|
|
On September 19 2012 06:51 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I suspect the Jewish population that has been wavering between Obama and Romney has still not made up their minds, and I doubt any amount of support for Israel will get that community to support Romney if he continues to make bizarre statements and gaffes. They won't buy into the MSM response or his pretzel logic. This isn't quite the straw that broke the camel's back, but it's another bale of hay that's burdening his camel. I'm not Jewish, so I don't have any inside thoughts on why they vote how they do, but I would think what happens in the next couple months with Israel, with Obama's "leadership" would have more effect than Romney's comments. Besides, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason, and the Jewish stereotype is not one of being a group of leechers, so I'm not sure they care so much, let alone even disagree. I think at this point, it's safe to say that either Romney or Obama could run around naked for the next week, and polls wouldn't shift more than 2%.
The Jewish community is not going to vote for an idiot. It just won't happen, I'm sorry. These remarks aren't going to lose voters because they're insulting them directly, they'll lose voters because they are so monumentally idiotic and he's defending them anyway. It would be one thing if he retracted or rationalized his dumb comments, but he has done neither of those things.
Obama would literally have to tell Netanyahu to go to hell and let Iran sent military forces into Israel unopposed for Romney to get enough traction to fight that, especially since Romney's response appears to be to make Muslims in the Middle East even MORE angry at the United States and Israel.
|
On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well.
Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago.
|
On September 19 2012 06:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:51 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I suspect the Jewish population that has been wavering between Obama and Romney has still not made up their minds, and I doubt any amount of support for Israel will get that community to support Romney if he continues to make bizarre statements and gaffes. They won't buy into the MSM response or his pretzel logic. This isn't quite the straw that broke the camel's back, but it's another bale of hay that's burdening his camel. I'm not Jewish, so I don't have any inside thoughts on why they vote how they do, but I would think what happens in the next couple months with Israel, with Obama's "leadership" would have more effect than Romney's comments. Besides, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason, and the Jewish stereotype is not one of being a group of leechers, so I'm not sure they care so much, let alone even disagree. I think at this point, it's safe to say that either Romney or Obama could run around naked for the next week, and polls wouldn't shift more than 2%. The Jewish community is not going to vote for an idiot. It just won't happen, I'm sorry. These remarks aren't going to lose voters because they're insulting them directly, they'll lose voters because they are so monumentally idiotic and he's defending them anyway. It would be one thing if he retracted or rationalized his dumb comments, but he has done neither of those things.
You conclude the comments are "monumentally idiotic". A very significant part of the country agrees with what Romney said. The "gaffe" is that he verbalized them. There are plenty of things that people think, but they know they can't verbalize, politically. This would fall into that category.
|
On September 19 2012 06:55 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well. Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago.
You are not the person I expected to say this, much less beat me to it. I have to stop trying to be productive when this thread is active; I can't help but F5.
|
On September 19 2012 06:56 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:53 TheTenthDoc wrote:On September 19 2012 06:51 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I suspect the Jewish population that has been wavering between Obama and Romney has still not made up their minds, and I doubt any amount of support for Israel will get that community to support Romney if he continues to make bizarre statements and gaffes. They won't buy into the MSM response or his pretzel logic. This isn't quite the straw that broke the camel's back, but it's another bale of hay that's burdening his camel. I'm not Jewish, so I don't have any inside thoughts on why they vote how they do, but I would think what happens in the next couple months with Israel, with Obama's "leadership" would have more effect than Romney's comments. Besides, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason, and the Jewish stereotype is not one of being a group of leechers, so I'm not sure they care so much, let alone even disagree. I think at this point, it's safe to say that either Romney or Obama could run around naked for the next week, and polls wouldn't shift more than 2%. The Jewish community is not going to vote for an idiot. It just won't happen, I'm sorry. These remarks aren't going to lose voters because they're insulting them directly, they'll lose voters because they are so monumentally idiotic and he's defending them anyway. It would be one thing if he retracted or rationalized his dumb comments, but he has done neither of those things. You conclude the comments are "monumentally idiotic". A very significant part of the country agrees with what Romney said. The "gaffe" is that he verbalized them. There are plenty of things that people think, but they know they can't verbalize, politically. This would fall into that category.
The Jewish community does not agree that the 47% of the country that receives more tax benefits than they pay taxes is going to vote for Obama no matter what, nor do they believe (since many Jewish independents are former Democrats) that all Democrats are entitled and feel like victims. This is mostly because these things are factually incorrect.
Edit: If they on balance did believe either of those things I would be incredibly, incredibly shocked, because I have literally never met a Republican Jewish person that lacked a basic grasp of the economic and political status of the nation, let alone an independent one. Even Jonah Goldberg would struggle to say these comments are correct without having to do mental gymnastics.
|
On September 19 2012 06:55 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well. Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago.
I wouldn't say "public opinion", but it had its effect on small business owners, not all of whom were always, or automatically in Romney's camp.
|
On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Here's the full quote, jdseemore-lazyass.
But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there’s not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it’s not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.
Now these are in some communities, you know, I think what you’ll find is, is that people of every background — there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you’ll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I’d be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you’re doing what you’re doing.
The difference is huge -- when given the full context, Obama is actually empathizing with these people in rural areas that despise them. He understands why these people in their communities don't trust their government, and are skeptical of him and his agenda.
Romney does not empathize or understand the 47% that don't pay income tax, who they are, and assumes they're all irresponsible deadbeats that will vote Obama because they're irresponsible deadbeats. He quite plainly has contempt for them. Romney's quote actually gets worse when more context is revealed.
|
On September 19 2012 06:58 Kaitlin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well. Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago. I wouldn't say "public opinion", but it had its effect on small business owners, not all of whom were always, or automatically in Romney's camp.
I don't understand why any small business owner would vote for a democrat unless their social values greatly outweighed their economic values and interests.
EDIT: The one major exception to this rule that comes to mind would be trial lawyers. Generally speaking, it is within their economic interest to vote for democrats.
|
On September 19 2012 07:04 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:58 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well. Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago. I wouldn't say "public opinion", but it had its effect on small business owners, not all of whom were always, or automatically in Romney's camp. I don't understand why any small business owner would vote for a democrat unless their social values greatly outweighed their economic values and interests.
Because the economic plans of Democrats are better for the economy and for business owners in general.
|
On September 19 2012 06:16 madsweepslol wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 05:53 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 19 2012 05:48 madsweepslol wrote:On September 19 2012 05:19 xDaunt wrote:
I think that a little much is being made of the significance of the 47% comments. Was it helpful? Of course not. Is it harmful? Possibly at the margins, and probably only short term. Hopefully Romney will use this as an opportunity to take the gloves off and throw out some meaty policy for people to chew on. Like all the meaty policies he's detailed so far? To be fair, I don't think Obama's put out any meaty plans of his own. If he has, let me know - I'd love to know what he'd do with another 4 years. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/06/comparing-romneys-and-obamas-jobs-plans/
So he's just going to resurrect whatever past bills got voted down already? That can't seriously be it.
|
On September 19 2012 07:06 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 07:04 xDaunt wrote:On September 19 2012 06:58 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 19 2012 06:52 Kaitlin wrote:On September 19 2012 06:48 HunterX11 wrote:On September 19 2012 06:44 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 06:34 TheTenthDoc wrote:
If you can find me a single quote from a Democrat that won an election that dismisses the entire Republican party as [insert negative property here] I will agree with this. I could probably offer numerous examples. Obviously it won't be as explicit as you want it to be. But the first comment that comes to mind is this one by Obama, quite obviously referring to many Republican voters: "And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." Obama probably did permanently lose a lot of voters from that remark. And despite how people like to explain it away, "You didn't build that" hurt him as well. Actually, I'm not sure it really has. It's hard to look at the polls and say, "that comment cost Obama X%." I just don't really get the sense that the comment has demonstrably moved public opinion one way or another since it was made three-four months ago. I wouldn't say "public opinion", but it had its effect on small business owners, not all of whom were always, or automatically in Romney's camp. I don't understand why any small business owner would vote for a democrat unless their social values greatly outweighed their economic values and interests. Because the economic plans of Democrats are better for the economy and for business owners in general.
if you give the top bracket tax breaks they will share the wealth and help grow the economy instead of putting it in their pockets!. It is only logical for people to share their wealth and hire more workers without any change in demand just because they acquired a little more profit on the side? right??
Oh and if the wealth does not go into their pockets guess where it goes? Overseas (Not america)
So no, wealth does not trickle down, at least not to us.
|
On September 19 2012 06:43 Signet wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:42 kmillz wrote:On September 19 2012 06:23 MinusPlus wrote:On September 19 2012 06:15 kmillz wrote:On September 19 2012 06:07 BlueBird. wrote:On September 19 2012 05:59 jdseemoreglass wrote:On September 19 2012 05:57 Gorsameth wrote:On September 19 2012 05:53 Wolvmatt. wrote:On September 19 2012 05:47 Gorsameth wrote:
How can anyone running for President say that almost half of the people in the country that he wants to lead are insignificant.
Im sorry but i think a president should do more then cater to the 50.1% that voted for him. You can't give everybody everything. Ofcourse you can't but there is a different between trying to do the best for everyone and flat out dismissing 47% of your country as useless bags of meat. That's not what he did. He said it's a waste to fight for the vote of people who are already decided. How do you read that as "half the country is insignificant"? Come on people, do you think Obama is fighting for the Tea Party vote? Should he? Does that mean he dismisses them as insignificant citizens? This stuff is very basic. I actually honestly believe that Romney doesn't care about me if he got elected, and I pay taxes, so why should those that don't think that? He just doesn't seem to have a grasp on the reality that is America today, and that truly scares me. Look I don't think it's just this quote that is making people feel this way, it's him in general. Yes I understand he's not going for their vote, but the way in which he dismisses them makes people worried. Also, it's basically absolutely untrue that 47% of the country is solely dependent on the government and are begging for hand outs. I actually honestly believe that Obama doesn't care about anybody, just their votes. The same could be said about Romney to be honest, but unfortunately we are stuck between choosing between a Turd Sandwich and a Giant Douche. Almost asked you to label the relevant candidates for this election, but I think that's entrapment. Obama, Romney, Ron Paul, Gary Johnson Eventually most of the people who really want someone besides Obama and Romney will end up voting for Obama or Romney because of the candidate they don't want to get elected  sadly I am on the fence and am actually still undecided between Romney and either Ron Paul/GaryJohnson (depending who from the third party has the most support, and depending on if they actually will ever get a chance) Where do you live? If it's not a swing state vote 3rd party. I most likely will do this myself, since DC is completely noncompetitive.
Ohio unfortunately so Romney will likely get my vote unless Ron Paul or Gary Johnson pull something crazy out of their asses
|
On September 19 2012 06:51 Defacer wrote:
Money quote:
"Running for president in the YouTube era, you realize you have to be very judicious in what you say. You have to be careful with your humor. You have to recognize that anytime you’re running for the presidency of the United States, you’re on," - Mitt Romney, in a 2007 interview.
Better money quote:
"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that, 'the buck stops here.' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. America deserves better."
Barack H. Obama, March 2006
|
On September 19 2012 07:21 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:16 madsweepslol wrote:On September 19 2012 05:53 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 19 2012 05:48 madsweepslol wrote:On September 19 2012 05:19 xDaunt wrote:
I think that a little much is being made of the significance of the 47% comments. Was it helpful? Of course not. Is it harmful? Possibly at the margins, and probably only short term. Hopefully Romney will use this as an opportunity to take the gloves off and throw out some meaty policy for people to chew on. Like all the meaty policies he's detailed so far? To be fair, I don't think Obama's put out any meaty plans of his own. If he has, let me know - I'd love to know what he'd do with another 4 years. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/06/comparing-romneys-and-obamas-jobs-plans/ So he's just going to resurrect whatever past bills got voted down already? That can't seriously be it.
You mean he's going to keep trying to push a proposal that was never seriously considered in the first place since Republican reps just stuck their fingers in their ears and shouted 'NONONONO!'? Yes.
|
On September 19 2012 07:21 JonnyBNoHo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 06:16 madsweepslol wrote:On September 19 2012 05:53 JonnyBNoHo wrote:On September 19 2012 05:48 madsweepslol wrote:On September 19 2012 05:19 xDaunt wrote:
I think that a little much is being made of the significance of the 47% comments. Was it helpful? Of course not. Is it harmful? Possibly at the margins, and probably only short term. Hopefully Romney will use this as an opportunity to take the gloves off and throw out some meaty policy for people to chew on. Like all the meaty policies he's detailed so far? To be fair, I don't think Obama's put out any meaty plans of his own. If he has, let me know - I'd love to know what he'd do with another 4 years. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/07/06/comparing-romneys-and-obamas-jobs-plans/ So he's just going to resurrect whatever past bills got voted down already? That can't seriously be it.
Uh, the article linked says that Obama's plan includes increasing infrastructure investment, hiring more state and local workers, doubling the payroll tax cut, and adding a new tax cut for small business and companies that hire new employees. These all seem sound and actionable to me.
Besides, why not resurrect bills that got voted down if you believe they are right for the country? Should his jobs plan be suboptimal? No one cares about bipartisanship anymore anyway.
|
Obama
47%
-1
Romney
46%
+1
Gallup poll. Looks like all you folks saying "Romney is in alot of trouble after that 47% comment in that leaked video!" are wrong.
|
On September 19 2012 07:29 kmillz wrote:
Obama
47%
-1
Romney
46%
+1
Gallup poll. Looks like all you folks saying "Romney is in alot of trouble after that 47% comment in that leaked video!" are wrong.
Don't Gallup results lag by a day? They update at 1 PM EST. Romney's leaks happened last night. If they called people this morning I don't think they would have heard about them yet.
|
News caption from 2014:
"Trade negotiations with China break down when secret video of President Romney wearing slanted-eye novelty glasses while making ching-chong noises surfaces."
|
On September 19 2012 07:33 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 07:29 kmillz wrote:
Obama
47%
-1
Romney
46%
+1
Gallup poll. Looks like all you folks saying "Romney is in alot of trouble after that 47% comment in that leaked video!" are wrong. Don't Gallup results lag by a day? Romney's leaks happened last night. If they called people this morning I don't think they would have heard about them yet.
It's a 7-day running average poll. We won't know the effects for a week.
|
On September 19 2012 07:34 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 19 2012 07:33 TheTenthDoc wrote:On September 19 2012 07:29 kmillz wrote:
Obama
47%
-1
Romney
46%
+1
Gallup poll. Looks like all you folks saying "Romney is in alot of trouble after that 47% comment in that leaked video!" are wrong. Don't Gallup results lag by a day? Romney's leaks happened last night. If they called people this morning I don't think they would have heard about them yet. It's a 7-day running average poll. We won't know the effects for a week.
I assumed he was talking about the Gallup-daily poll at the right margin.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
