EPTWhy don't they teach something so simple?
President Obama Re-Elected - Page 850
| 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 | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
Why don't they teach something so simple? | ||
|
JinDesu
United States3990 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 xDaunt wrote: I'm scoring ties this time because it is a lot easier to keep track of each topic. Understood - is the tie the middle or end? | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:25 Sermokala wrote: Its a pretty obvious difference if your into guns. Assault weapons are designed to wound people. Hunting guns are designed to kill them. People get scared when they see the government wanted to take away their guns. It will never go well out in the sticks. Obvious difference? Really? So is a .45 caliber hand gun meant to hunt or to wound people? Or to kill people? There is nothing obvious about it, and yes I know about guns. | ||
|
I_Love_Bacon
United States5765 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:25 m4inbrain wrote: Just asking, is CNN neutral, or are they kinda supporting someone of these two? May be a stupid question, but as i said, i did not follow until now? If you want the correct answer, very few media giants have a horse in the race (owners might). Any broadcaster wants a fight to the death in the political arena. Regardless of how lopsided a campaign might be, the media will still do everything in its power to pretend, convince, or lie to the public to get them to believe it is close. By doing so, they ensure additional ad revenue by the campaigns. They make the most money during election time, so keeping it close is in their vested interest. It might seem like I'm rambling off topic a bit, but it's insanely important. The media is insanely important in determining who wins the election. They're not looking to inform and they're not looking for truth - they're looking for an entertaining fight to keep ratings and revue high as that is their only concern. | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
| ||
|
TheTenthDoc
United States9561 Posts
Edit: Romney seems to have read his Macro 101 textbook. | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
this isn't the 19th century. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
| ||
|
TheRabidDeer
United States3806 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:25 TheTenthDoc wrote: Even Bill aged badly. BILL. Romanian detected. I hope. I am never sure in political threads | ||
|
CajunMan
United States823 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:27 Defacer wrote: George W. Bush looked like a pile of shit after his presidency. Ya if you look at GW at the beginning of 8 years he looked 40 at the end looked like he was 70. | ||
|
Adila
United States874 Posts
| ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 JinDesu wrote: Understood - is the tie the middle or end? The end number. | ||
|
Deathmanbob
United States2356 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 Defacer wrote: what does that mean, labelling China a 'currency manipulator?' idk but i dont think it does anything good. | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 Gamegene wrote: lol... did he really just say tariffs...? this isn't the 19th century. his economist buddies are cringing if they haven't already turned the debate off from the dumb questions. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18866 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 Defacer wrote: what does that mean, labelling China a 'currency manipulator?' It practically means nothing. Figuratively it allows one to dance amongst the clouds of foreign economic policy excellence. | ||
|
BluePanther
United States2776 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:28 Defacer wrote: what does that mean, labelling China a 'currency manipulator?' they toy with their currency to gain favorable exchange rates or something. I've read the stuff on it before, it's blatant and real. I don't know the specifics though, so I can't comment too much about it. | ||
|
jdseemoreglass
United States3773 Posts
On October 17 2012 11:29 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Obamacare is the reason for outsourcing? Obamacare does increase outsourcing, since it increases costs on employers hiring Americans. | ||
|
Defacer
Canada5052 Posts
| ||
| ||
