| Forum Index > General Forum |
Hey guys! We'll be closing this thread shortly, but we will make an American politics megathread where we can continue the discussions in here. The new thread can be found here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=383301 | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:02 Swazi Spring wrote: Left-wing media is so biased that even their "tests" try to show Obama winning. And you're so biased you look for meaning in "tests" to prop up your accusations. The world keeps turning. | ||
|
heliusx
United States2306 Posts
On October 25 2012 13:06 Hug-A-Hydralisk wrote: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-yFiR45zcQjo/UIiwvQ4JClI/AAAAAAAAALU/a795jMbW66o/s1600/obama+funny.jpg) It feels like economic growth and prosperity is against Obama's agenda. Spreading the wealth so everything is "fair" for others looking into starting a small business is just plain dumb. Obama believes that the government has the ability to resolve our problems while Romney believes in private enterprises and has distrust in government intervention. Obama favors universal access to health care and associated benefits as a critical expansion of the welfare state. Its so irritating to hear Obama say the rich need to be taxed a little bit more to spread the wealth around. Unemployment is only bad because banks don't lend as much since 2008's crisis, trillions of dollars are just sitting around doing nothing within banks and there's idle workers. If you aren't building anything than your SCVs and the workers inside your barrackses and factories will be idle and not getting pay checks. Those are just my 2 cents, Obama is going to drag this recession on for another 4 years. employment is bad because banks aren't lending and obama is dragging on a recession we are no longer in. i'm not sure where you are getting these ideas but they are retarded and you don't have a clue. you should probably do a little bit of research independent of where ever you are getting your ridiculous ideas from. | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:03 Risen wrote: Or maybe that's how it's projected to be right now so that's what they went with? You still have no relevant point to this thread. Don't know why I expect anything substantial from you, but I'll keep hoping you shape up. Romney is winning in all of the polls, so they clearly didn't go with what it is projected to be. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:06 Swazi Spring wrote: Romney is winning in all of the polls, so they clearly didn't go with what it is projected to be. What... Edit: And by what I mean, your source please? Double Edit: Though to be fair, in this case I didn't post any source for my claim that Obama was leading the polls. It was something I assumed. Triple Edit: I use this front page, usually. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:07 Risen wrote: What... Edit: And by what I mean, your source please? Double Edit: Though to be fair, in this case I didn't post any source for my claim that Obama was leading the polls. It was something I assumed. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
| ||
|
Focuspants
Canada780 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:10 Swazi Spring wrote: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html And you pick the general election poll. If you understood your own political system, you would post polls related to the electoral college, the only thing that fucking matters. The same site you just used as a source has a list of battleground states, in which Obama is leading in: Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota, and is tied in Virginia. You are so intellectually dishonest, it is unreal. That, or you enjoy fooling yourself into finding "facts" to perpetuate your ridiculous beliefs. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:06 Swazi Spring wrote: Romney is winning in all of the polls, so they clearly didn't go with what it is projected to be. Um, Ohio 5 points Obama from a fresh poll. Nevada Obama +4 or +2 depending on the poll. Wisdconsin Obama +2 and lastly New Hampshire Obama +9. Those numbers alone put him over 270 so thats where simulations are coming from. | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:12 Focuspants wrote: And you pick the general election poll. If you understood your own political system, you would post polls related to the electoral college, the only thing that fucking matters. I know how the electoral college works. The "news" channel was "reporting" on the popular vote, not the electoral vote. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
Oh how great would it be if Obama won off the Electoral College and not the popular vote. How awesome would that be :D | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On October 25 2012 13:21 BluePanther wrote: No, but you are required to do certain things when people are in distress. Such as you would be expected to call the fire department if you see a fire in an occupied house. Sure. However, loaning your womb to a fetus for nine months incurs a potentially significant cost to yourself, so it belongs in the same category as rushing into a burning building, rather than calling the fire department. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:14 Swazi Spring wrote: Wow, you're such an asshole. I know how the electoral college works. The "news" channel was "reporting" on the popular vote, not the electoral vote. Well if both republicans and democrats have suffered defeats because of the college and not the popular vote in 2 of the last 4 elections than maybe they can work together to get rid of the stupid thing. Edit: Oops I quoted wrong person. | ||
|
Focuspants
Canada780 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:06 Swazi Spring wrote: Romney is winning in all of the polls Read what you wrote. Then claim that your poll proves this. | ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:10 Swazi Spring wrote: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html Unfortunately, RCP divorces their state poll projections and general election projections as far as I know, which makes their predicted average kind of silly. I mean, if you aggregate the popular vote totals their states indicate, I *think* Obama comes out on top, and if you let the two values meet in the middle the race is virtually tied or Obama advantage. Edit: That reminds me, I find it pretty gratifying Gallup is normalizing day by day from being an outlier. Wonder how far it'll go. | ||
|
Rassy
Netherlands2308 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:07 Risen wrote: What... Edit: And by what I mean, your source please? Double Edit: Though to be fair, in this case I didn't post any source for my claim that Obama was leading the polls. It was something I assumed. Triple Edit: I use this front page, usually. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ O thats a nice site, thx for link. Polls in usa say little , the usa has a district system where the winner takes all. Polls dont take this into account,or do they? To get a good indication you should look at the odds betting agencys have. I think they are way more reliable then the polls (after all:monney is on the line) If understand the site correctly they have obama at 60% favourable? (the intrade odds figure) | ||
|
sunprince
United States2258 Posts
On October 25 2012 13:01 Romantic wrote: Like I said, you are calling your opinions rights. Or rather, judicial activism is fine and dandy. The 9th amendment was never intended to grand infinite powers to judges. You are taking a bill of rights designed to limit federal power and using that as justification for the federal government destroying state laws (often supported by majorities of both men and women of that state) prohibiting abortion. Most legal scholars will not say the 9th amendment is a blank check to give judges the power to invent rights and enforce them or that it is a source of new rights. You're missing the point completely. My argument is that the right to bodily autonomy is consistent with the rest of the Constitution as well as our modern understanding of the law. Let me ask you this again since you dodged the question. Do you think do you think it would be Constitutionally permissable for the government to force people to donate blood/marrow/organs to save other people's lives? Or would you consider that a violation of people's rights? Would it be "judicial activism" to find that the government forcing people to donate body parts is unconstitutional? Is that an "opinion" rather than a "right? Please confirm whether you're batshit insane or explain the reason for your inconsistency before we continue this conversation. On October 25 2012 13:01 Romantic wrote: How would you feel if a new Court decided the right of fetuses to live was a 9th amendment right? Depends on the court's opinion. Is the decision consistent with the Constitution and our understanding of the law? Would the Court then consider it acceptable for the governemtn to force people to donate body parts? | ||
|
Swazi Spring
United States415 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:14 Risen wrote: Yeah... I always look at results in light of the Electoral College. Obama is still set to win the Electoral College. Oh how great would it be if Obama won off the Electoral College and not the popular vote. How awesome would that be :D There's a good chance of that happening. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
Reducing the deficit, just a little at a time. Still don't see any sort of plan from Romney, and while this normally would just be some run of the mill thing, I find it ironic that he's supposed to "save" our economy (that's consistently showing improvement already) while pushing for stuff like this. Then again, front page of reddit is where I found this beauty. HAVE AT HER! | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:12 Focuspants wrote: And you pick the general election poll. If you understood your own political system, you would post polls related to the electoral college, the only thing that fucking matters. The same site you just used as a source has a list of battleground states, in which Obama is leading in: Ohio, Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Minnesota, and is tied in Virginia. You are so intellectually dishonest, it is unreal. That, or you enjoy fooling yourself into finding "facts" to perpetuate your ridiculous beliefs. You realize RCP is the standard, right? | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On October 25 2012 14:29 Risen wrote: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/oct/24/barack-obama/obama-says-romney-would-spend-2-trilllion-military/ Reducing the deficit, just a little at a time. Still don't see any sort of plan from Romney, and while this normally would just be some run of the mill thing, I find it ironic that he's supposed to "save" our economy (that's consistently showing improvement already) while pushing for stuff like this. Then again, front page of reddit is where I found this beauty. HAVE AT HER! When's the last time a presidential candidate had a highly detailed plan? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
Escore
IntoTheTV X SOOP
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
Spirit vs Mixu
Clem vs TBD
RSL Revival
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
