| 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 | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On November 02 2012 03:39 sam!zdat wrote: I'm about ready to emigrate. I still got 6 years here, though... edit: really what I want is an independent west coast. Hail Cascadia! lol cascadia. almost as real as the state of superior. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
| ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On November 02 2012 03:39 sam!zdat wrote: I'm about ready to emigrate. I still got 6 years here, though... edit: really what I want is an independent west coast. Hail Cascadia! Doing hard time?  I'm holding out for an independent New England myself... though we'd need a better name than that I suppose. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On November 02 2012 03:46 BluePanther wrote: lol cascadia. almost as real as the state of superior. let me have my fantasies | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
Signet
United States1718 Posts
If Washington and Oregon leave, this country will move hard right. The remaining United States of Texas will take one look at the tree on your flag and send our gigantic army, now 35% of GDP, to liberate your oil. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
| ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On November 02 2012 04:03 sam!zdat wrote: Sorry, xdaunt, you're on the wrong team to be able to use that word. you can take vicarious pleasure if you'd like, however Quit being a faggot, and suck that dick. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?fsrc=scn/rd_ec/which_one_ a sign of the times when a right-liberal stronghold endorses obama over romney. although wtih the shit romney has said no one in their right mind can endorse him and retain credibility. | ||
|
kwizach
3658 Posts
On November 02 2012 03:45 xDaunt wrote: I'm not sure that I affirmatively stated one candidate would win the republican party so much as I pointed out who the frontrunners were at various points. I'm sure, and you did. I distinctively remember the post in which you asserted that Perry would beat both Romney and Obama, and you were basing that assertion on the job creation record of Texas - instead of looking at the other factors which indicated Perry would likely have no chance of winning the election. On November 02 2012 03:45 xDaunt wrote:When Perry entered the fray, I named him the frontrunner. Rick Perry would have won the nomination had he not self-destructed in the debates. In fact, when everyone talking about his "best" debate performance as the one that would turn his fortunes around, I stuck a fork him in him because I knew that his performance was horrible and would be perceived as horrible by the electorate. Please, everyone on these forums (and pretty much everywhere else) knew Perry was toast after his first debate performances. And it was pretty obvious from the start that, regardless of his performance in the debates and in the primary, he would stand no chance at the national level - especially for the people who were actually familiar with Perry (I personally did not know much about him, but his "prayer rally" and a few other things I read about him were more than enough). On November 02 2012 03:45 xDaunt wrote:As for my presidential pick prediction, I stated that Romney would beat Obama and win big. I also stated that I would reevaluate my prediction after each debate. In short, I didn't see any reason to change my prediction after the debates. I know you did. My point is that you've refused to acknowledge the changes in momentum, refused to acknowledge how well Obama was doing before the first debate, and you basically have not put forward any real valid analysis of why Romney would, according to you, beat Obama. You basically replaced your initial pick, Perry, by Romney. Mind you, I'm certainly not saying everyone else put more thought into the election than you. I'm simply pointing out that if Romney wins, it won't vindicate your "analysis". | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On November 02 2012 04:04 oneofthem wrote: reading this TE endorsement of obama, i can't help but think if they still think fiscal tightening is alright. http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21565623-america-could-do-better-barack-obama-sadly-mitt-romney-does-not-fit-bill-which-one?fsrc=scn/rd_ec/which_one_ a sign of the times when a right-liberal stronghold endorses obama over romney. although wtih the shit romney has said no one in their right mind can endorse him and retain credibility. The Economist is more libertarian than conservative though. Their type of "right" isn't the same as the American "right". | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
nevertheless the way things are, the "American right" you refer to now is not even a serious political position. it's just a mass of resentment misdirected. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On November 02 2012 04:10 oneofthem wrote: i think they are plenty rightwing. even blaming healthcare cost on liberals (rofl) and getting wet for reagan in 2012... nevertheless the way things are, the "American right" you refer to now is not even a serious political position. it's just a mass of resentment misdirected. Health care costs are going to go up because of the ACA. Maybe not for you and I, at the point of our pocketbooks, but the overall social costs will increase. I know the Democrats trumpet the good parts of it and use the figures that help them most, but the amount of burden it places on businesses is unacceptable imo. There are better ways to do it. Those who think the ACA is a good piece of legislation are naive. It does some good things, but overall it is a mess. | ||
|
Fueled
United States1610 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 02 2012 04:13 BluePanther wrote: Health care costs are going to go up because of the ACA. Maybe not for you and I, at the point of our pocketbooks, but the overall social costs will increase. I know the Democrats trumpet the good parts of it and use the figures that help them most, but the amount of burden it places on businesses is unacceptable imo. There are better ways to do it. Those who think the ACA is a good piece of legislation are naive. It does some good things, but overall it is a mess. the point made here was that the left wanted a single payer system. so obama's move to the right on healthcare is to blame for not having cost down. | ||
|
Darknat
United States122 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On November 02 2012 04:26 Darknat wrote: Climate change becoming a political issue was the dumbest thing ever so I say "up yours" Bloomberg, I already voted for Romney. Can you make this your sig? Pretty please, it speaks so highly of you. | ||
| ||
|
|
FEL
Patches Events
AI Arena Tournament
FEL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
IntoTheTV X SOOP
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
