President Obama Re-Elected - Page 1424

On November 10 2012 03:28 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
The game is already changing. House Reps said they're willing to compromise and for revenue increases to occur. If Dems counter with a no compromise proposition then the responsibility will shift to them.

On November 10 2012 01:55 paralleluniverse wrote:
To add to my above post about the fiscal cliff: Krugman's op-ed today advises Obama to go over the fiscal cliff if necessary. His argument is basically: "We do not negotiate with terrorists!" And there's some nice snark in this post about Erskine Bowles.

On November 10 2012 03:28 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
The game is already changing. House Reps said they're willing to compromise and for revenue increases to occur. If Dems counter with a no compromise proposition then the responsibility will shift to them.

On November 10 2012 03:31 acker wrote:

So much for that mandate. If they're bending two days after the election, I look forward to December.

On November 10 2012 04:41 CajunMan wrote:
http://nation.foxnews.com/2012-presidential-election/2012/11/09/obama-reelection-triggers-massive-layoffs-across-america

Just a few of the companies laying people off after the election. The list also includes Energizer, Boeing, Lockheed ,and many in the medical field just to name a few. Expect second quarter of next year to be not just bad but a second recession. It is also no coincidence the DOW took a nose dive Wednesday morning.

On November 10 2012 04:49 TrickyGilligan wrote:


Lol, did you read the article?

102 employees laid off in Utah. Sucks for them, but that is by no means a "recession."

In total, the article mentions less than 1000 people losing their jobs.

On November 09 2012 00:24 sc2superfan101 wrote:

have you been in this thread.... at all? I reckon I've been discussing this election in here a whole lot longer than you, and I made this point before the election, so please try not to assume you know something when you don't.

"Kill Romney" was the Democrat strategy, in their own words, for this campaign. and that statement was made before Romney had even won the primaries, so don't come talking to me about running a campaign on hate.

edit: FTR, I do think the Republicans needed to be better with their language and with the perception that they were giving off. so to add to my first point, don't assume things. I'll condemn Republican hate just as much as I'll condemn any hate from any side.

On November 08 2012 23:02 sc2superfan101 wrote:

all religions are cults.

does no one understand the definition of cult anymore?

On November 09 2012 01:08 kwizach wrote:
Karl Rove made no good point. The Fox News analysts weren't simply basing their projection on the difference at that point between the two candidates, they were basing it on where the remaining votes to be counted would go. They had way more information than Rove at their disposal on that matter - something he acknowledged himself -, and Rove's objection was precisely rooted in his incorrect belief that the Republican votes that remained to be counted could outweigh the Democratic votes that remained to be counted. Since the entire point of the projection was that this wasn't the case, Rove had no good point - only disbelief and shock at seeing his predictions be contradicted by reality.

On November 09 2012 01:08 kwizach wrote:
Karl Rove made no good point. The Fox News analysts weren't simply basing their projection on the difference at that point between the two candidates, they were basing it on where the remaining votes to be counted would go. They had way more information than Rove at their disposal on that matter - something he acknowledged himself -, and Rove's objection was precisely rooted in his incorrect belief that the Republican votes that remained to be counted could outweigh the Democratic votes that remained to be counted. Since the entire point of the projection was that this wasn't the case, Rove had no good point - only disbelief and shock at seeing his predictions be contradicted by reality.