President Obama Re-Elected - Page 133

On June 15 2012 18:11 Defacer wrote:
But you have to fair, sc2superfan. Over the course of Obama's presidency there were many instances when the Conservative Congress was willfully obstructing progress and being obstinate, and opposing Obama's decisions simply because he was Obama.

Remember last Christmas when Boehner lost control of Congress, and the Republicans almost allowed taxes to rise after Obama and the Senate agreed to extend the payroll tax? Or their endless cock-blocking of routine appointments of key positions -- filled by personnel agreed upon by Republicans and Democrats -- which Obama eventually had to circumvent?

This kind of active sabotage is not revisionist history or imagined. You can blame Obama for not compromising or understanding the conservative perspective, but you can equally blame Republican congress for creating an environment where compromise wasn't even an option.

How do you compromise with someone that who's idea of negotiation is holding their breath until they pass out?

On June 16 2012 07:13 Chargelot wrote:


1/3 of respondents != 1/3 of Americans. Sadly, when you target stupid people for your survey, you get a lot of stupid answers. I wish people could get this. No group of people except an all-inclusive group of ~305M people can speak for ~305M people.

On June 16 2012 07:07 forgottendreams wrote:


How do I protect myself from the collapse? Do you think I should buy a bunker or sell my house and put into gold?

On June 16 2012 07:19 sc2superfan101 wrote:

yeah, well, that is moving the goalposts wildly beyond what could be considered reasonable. i suppose that you don't take any polls into account, ever, for any reason? i mean, that's a fine position to take, and i can't really argue with it, but at the same time, you are in the vast minority on that.

On June 16 2012 05:56 snailmouth wrote:




Exactly my point! It doesn't matter who wins. But here's the deal, we owe 3.5 trillion in interest for the year of 2012 SO FAR.. its going up by a rate of 287,000 dollars a minute. On top of that we have a budget deficit so large that we need to borrow another 1.5 trillion. The real problem is we only have about 2 trillion dollars of tax revenue coming in (which is slowly decreasing by 700 dollars a minute GO OBAMA!! GET THE PHAT CATS!!) so how do you pay those bills? You dont YOU BORROW MORE and then you're interest GOES UP!! Before you know it ladies and gents our national debt will far outweigh our GDP. YOU CAN EXPECT A DEFICIT OF AT LEAST 18 TRILLION DOLLARS NEXT YEAR! It's never going down its just going to keep growing and when it dwarfs the GDP our currency will crash.. Imminent collapse people.

On June 16 2012 07:17 sc2superfan101 wrote:

like i said, Obama has done nothing to compromise with us, so our position is that we shouldn't compromise with him, at all. if he had wanted to be a non-partisan President, he could have been. this idea that Republicans all hated Obama from the second he came in is revisionist history. most Republicans either supported Obama or were neutral about him, and they only turned on him when he decided to be the most leftist President we've ever had.

like i said, our definitions of compromise are so wildly different that im not sure there could ever be an agreement here.

"Ronald Reagan would have, based on his record of finding accommodation, finding some degree of common ground, as would my dad — they would have a hard time if you define the Republican party — and I don’t — as having an orthodoxy that doesn’t allow for disagreement, doesn’t allow for finding some common ground."

Conservatives might have ignored Bush’s apostasy except that this was the second time in two weeks that he had strayed from the reservation. On June 1, he told the House Budget Committee that he would be willing to accept a budget deal that cut spending $10 for every $1 of tax increase. The GOP party line is that taxes must not be increased by so much as a penny for any reason. Bush also denounced the so-called pledge against raising taxes that virtually every Republican has signed, noting that he never signed it.

Barack Obama has often praised Reagan. Meanwhile, Republican leaders admit that Reagan would clearly be out of step with his party and would not be able to secure its presidential nomination today. Jeb Bush is not the only one.

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee: “Ronald Reagan would have a very difficult, if not impossible time being nominated in this atmosphere of the Republican Party.”

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA): Reagan “would never be elected today in my opinion.”
Other Republicans note Reagan’s commitment to compromise and working with Democrats to find solutions to pressing national problems.

Former chairman of the Republican National CommitteeHaley Barbour: “Let me make sure that one thing is clear about Ronald Reagan’s Republican Party: Reagan did not demand or expect everyone to agree with him on every issue. He wasn’t a purist. Some candidates are vying to be the most conservative candidate, and some voters are seeking purity in their choice. Well, in politics purity is a dead-dog loser. You need unity. And purity is the enemy of unity.”

Former Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE): “Reagan wouldn't identify with this party. There's a streak of intolerance in the Republican Party today that scares people. Intolerance is a very dangerous thing in a society because it always leads to a tragic ending. Ronald Reagan was never driven by ideology. He was a conservative but he was a practical conservative. He wanted limited government but he used government and he used it many times. And he would work with the other party.”

On June 16 2012 07:51 aksfjh wrote:

I wasn't aware that we pay ~50% interest rates on U.S. debt, because that's what it would take to pay $3.5 trillion in interest in just 6 months.

In actuality, we're paying about $200-300 billion in interest payments per year at current interest rates, or just under 8% of our total budget. This is really what matters, and what plays a large role in determining if markets find U.S. debt attractive. As a point of comparison, we were spending closer to 10% of our budget on interest payments in 2007, before any sign of the collapse. Also, it's key to note how fast the economy is growing compared to the debt. As soon as the economy is growing faster, we'll start to see the debt to erode on its own.

On June 16 2012 07:17 sc2superfan101 wrote:

they opposed his policies because they did not believe in them, i might as well say that you opposed Bush just because he was Bush.


if you think that this kind of thing is anything new, then you need to learn what the term "Borking" means and where it comes from.


like i said, Obama has done nothing to compromise with us, so our position is that we shouldn't compromise with him, at all. if he had wanted to be a non-partisan President, he could have been. this idea that Republicans all hated Obama from the second he came in is revisionist history. most Republicans either supported Obama or were neutral about him, and they only turned on him when he decided to be the most leftist President we've ever had.

like i said, our definitions of compromise are so wildly different that im not sure there could ever be an agreement here.

On June 16 2012 07:51 aksfjh wrote:

I wasn't aware that we pay ~50% interest rates on U.S. debt, because that's what it would take to pay $3.5 trillion in interest in just 6 months.

In actuality, we're paying about $200-300 billion in interest payments per year at current interest rates, or just under 8% of our total budget. This is really what matters, and what plays a large role in determining if markets find U.S. debt attractive. As a point of comparison, we were spending closer to 10% of our budget on interest payments in 2007, before any sign of the collapse. Also, it's key to note how fast the economy is growing compared to the debt. As soon as the economy is growing faster, we'll start to see the debt to erode on its own.

On June 16 2012 10:33 snailmouth wrote:



you're just plain wrong we pay about 20% interest on our debt which is roughly 3 trillion a year and growing.
according to your 200 billion dollar figure the interest rate would be like 0.013% you really think thats our interest rate LMAO
www.usdebtclock.org

On June 16 2012 12:08 kwizach wrote:

I don't think you understand how the debt works. Do you know the difference between debt and deficit?

On April 19 2012 18:18 Mentalizor wrote:
Scumbag europeans will ruin this poll (^_^) Really to us (at least in Denmark) Obama is somewhat a right-wing politician and Romney is just off the charts right winged. I think if a vote between these two happened in Scandinavia Obama would have 80%+ of the votes.

On June 16 2012 16:41 snailmouth wrote:
I think you're just in denial or something. Do you understand that we have to pay interest on our 15 trillion dollar national debt? Do you understand that we make less money from taxes than the interest on the debt alone? We have already past the point of no return so like I said it doesn't matter if you are a member of Obama's personality cult or not because neither he or Romney can do a thing about it at this point. Not sure where you make the assumption that I don't know the difference between debt and deficit spending tho. I'm sure you do realize that deficit spending does add to the debt tho.. which in turn incurs interest.. which in turn adds to the deficit and the total debt.

Also i love how nobody is bringing up the obviously untrue "we only pay 200 billion in interest" after i pointed out the ridiculously low rate that would require 0.013%

Instead of making rational counter arguments you should all slap Obama bumper stickers on your foreheads, call me names and tell me how stupid I am.

On June 16 2012 09:21 Defacer wrote:
Edit: Obama's policies are to the right of Canada's conservative 'right-wing' Prime Minister.