The USA Political Thread

[lennco]

Here you can spout your USA political views.

Rules:
1. Keep it clean
2. No fighting
3. Respect the views of others.
4. US Political views, No Religious views
5. Have fun

:wave:

 

[JB Lions]

It was his anniversary, he was "taking care of business", besides being President. He was a little tired. It's ok - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope-a-dope Setting him up nicely. Getting led right down the garden path.

CNN Poll, who won the debate:
67-25 - won by Romney

 

[bmugford]

Very good debate.

Romney beat Obama by about 60%-40% and that's being nice to "El Presidente" who had 4min 20sec more time than Mitt. :O

I wonder how Verbster's blood is doing?

Obummer's gonna have to bring his teleprompter to the next debate.

First of all the format sucked. Jim Lehrer was too passive and overpowered by both candidates.

If Romney won the debate it is for one reason - it is hard to debate someone who has no core beliefs and contempt for facts.

Romney might have "won" the debate on style, but he certainly didn't on substance.

Let's see how it plays out when what he said is actually analyzed.

Brad

 

[GILSAN]

The Liberal Media is in shock. Their favorite Pussy Cat got mauled and now they are all licking their wounds, including some of the Big Shots here on the Break Room.

Romney 1 - MSM 0

A Massive humiliation for the Liberal Media :bingo: I'm lovin' it :kickass:

 

[RogueWriter]

Obama is a Chicago Politics survivor, look for the next round to get ugly. I will be really surprised if some accusation is not dropped on Romney shortly before the next debate, an attempt to throw him off his game.

But, this round was pretty sweet, Romney not only tossed the gauntlet down, he thwacked Obama upside the head with it first. Obama was back on his heels the whole debate.

If Romney does the same thing to Obama in the next round, it's over, because Obama certainly is not going to win the final debate, on foreign policy.

I bet Obama will come back strong the next debate.

 

[GILSAN]

Obama is a Chicago Politics survivor, look for the next round to get ugly. I will be really surprised if some accusation is not dropped on Romney shortly before the next debate, an attempt to throw him off his game.

You can bet on that. What will "El Presidente" do next? Make more appearances on the "View" and Letterman? Play a few more rounds of Golf with the Hollywood Elite or will he be forced to do his homework, which he finds a "drag"?

 

[JB Lions]

You can bet on that. What will "El Presidente" do next? Make more appearances on the "View" and Letterman? Play a few more rounds of Golf with the Hollywood Elite or will he be forced to do his homework, which he finds a "drag"?

Before you get overly excited, it's not about 1 debate, sometimes it's not even about who gets the most votes, it's the Electoral College. So knowing that and knowing this map has been 98% accurate over the last 2 elections - http://electoralmap.net/2012/intrade.php

Which of those do you disagree with?

We have the VP debate next:
Martha Raddatz (ABC News Chief Foreign Correspondent) - October 11, 2012 - VP debate

Biden is the opposite of Obama, more attack type and Ryan is kind of gooberish. No substance that I've seen so far, just nothing but talking points. So that should be a fun debate.

Then the next 2 debates:
Candy Crowley (CNN Chief Political Correspondent) - October 16, 2012 - Town meeting format including foreign and domestic policy

Bob Schieffer (Host of Face the Nation on CBS) - October 22, 2012 - Foreign policy

will have foreign policy.

Not good for Mitt because when asked what he would do differently than what Obama is doing now, he really doesn't have an answer. Except maybe get into another war.

While politicians tend to lie, stretch the truth, that is one thing where Romney is beating Obama at:

http://www.nationofchange.org/last-night-s-debate-romney-told-27-myths-38-minutes-1349364077

http://factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/

It'll catch up to him.

And there is a possibility, even tho slight, the Unemployment Rate dips below 8% before the election. They have been hammering on that 8%, even tho it was over 8% when Obama became President and went over 10%. You even have articles like this one today on Fox, trying to downplay that possibility:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/04/it-time-to-end-unemployment-rate-shell-game/

That sugar high will eventually wear off to reality.

Obama talking about not knowing what Romney showed up last night, reminded me of this video:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxch-yi14BE"]Will The Real Mitt Romney Please Stand Up (feat. Eminem) - YouTube[/ame]


Romney on '47 percent': I was 'completely wrong'

 

[Theo Goodman]

Obama did not debate well. At a TV debate it is important to look, and sound, good. He didnt look at Rmoney enough, he looked down often and he stumbled on some senteneces. However maybe this is why Rmoney was so aggresive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQZ5_qdHLV8&feature=youtu.be

 

[GILSAN]

It was his anniversary, he was "taking care of business", besides being President. He was a little tired. It's ok - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rope-a-dope Setting him up nicely. Getting led right down the garden path.

CNN Poll, who won the debate:
67-25 - won by Romney

Obama was stripped naked for 90 minutes, without the protection of the Media and his "old faithful" the "Teleprompter" The most intelligent politician (according to the MSM) since Biblical times, was ripped to shreds by someone who is competent and knows his business. Obama was even given a 4 min 20 sec. bonus in allocated time, meaning that the moderator was a little more lenient with Obama than with Romney, but even that made no difference in the final outcome of the debate.

Lots of complaints from the Libs and the Media about the format of the debates. What was wrong with the format? 2 minutes for each candidate is not enough? Too long? Obama didn't get enough time? The questions were too tough on Obama?

The Liberal moderator, Jim Lehrer (now considered a traitor amongst the Dems) will probably be sent to Guantanamo along with his Big Bird, to spend the last days of his retirement, for having the audacity of asking real, meaningful questions and allowing both candidates to speak. Apart from all those hurricanes, I understand Guantanamo has excellent weather.

Here are some other brilliant reasons why Obama did so bad:

Al Gore blamed it on the "altitude" in Denver. Perhaps he had a slip of the tongue and really meant "attitude"!

Michael Moore “This is what happens when u pick John Kerry as your debate coach” and “For the past 2 days, the Right has been pounding their ‘Obama is an angry black man video.’ Did this affect O, that he had to appear timid?”

Eva Longoria: I’m in New Zealand watching the presidential debate! Obama is killing it on health care! #Obama2012

Joy Behar lamented, “Obama blew it. I hate to say it but Romney was lying and Obama didn’t hit him on it,”

I hear MSNBC's Chris Mathews wet his pants after the debate, leaving a smelly puddle behind. Must have been that "trickle down his leg" feeling that he gets, when he sees Obama.

Even our "Break Room" contributor JB Lions blames it on Obama being tired, possibly because of his 20th wedding anniversary.

The other Liberal "Break Room" heavyweights went into silence mode, or maybe they flew to Alaska to make sure Verbster's blood pressure was OK


President Bill Clinton had it right about Obama when he said - "He's an incompetent amateur."

Here's a Boxing Video about the debate that RogueWriter will probably enjoy.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNhUI8ktHuw&feature=player_embedded"]Obama-Romney presidential debate 2012: Mitt clobbers Obama - YouTube[/ame]

And here's an interesting article from The Telegraph (UK)

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/t...-why-republicans-nominated-him/#disqus_thread

 

[JB Lions]

"Even our "Break Room" contributor JB Lions blames it on Obama being tired, possibly because of his 20th wedding anniversary."

That was joking, it went over your head.

The rest of your post is your usual media, blah blah stuff. I guess you don't realize you contradicted yourself throughout that post? The media has it in for Obama then "Lots of complaints from the Libs and the Media about the format of the debates." The time difference? Maybe because Willard lacks details, all talking points, so he really doesn't have much to say.

Media complained about itself?

You didn't tackle anything in my last post, because it's more reality based, a place you don't like to visit.

Look at the electoral map, tell me where it's wrong?

I watch Romney yesterday with the live music, fireworks, as if he's won an election, when it was just a debate, and "won" it more on looks, not facts. So it's not going to really help where it counts, election time. I think it's funny how overly excited you guys are getting, it's like setting yourself up for an even bigger disappointment. The ole' he who laughs last kind of deal.

This:
Romney on '47 percent': I was 'completely wrong'

Will come back on him, displays exactly what's wrong with him. So thanks to Willard for admitting it.

---------- Post added at 03:20 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:19 PM ----------

Ah, haha, game changer:

"The unemployment rate fell to 7.8% -- the first time it’s been below 8% since Jan. 2009."

What I talked about above, came true.

And there is a possibility, even tho slight, the Unemployment Rate dips below 8% before the election. They have been hammering on that 8%, even tho it was over 8% when Obama became President and went over 10%. You even have articles like this one today on Fox, trying to downplay that possibility:

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/04/it-time-to-end-unemployment-rate-shell-game/

One of the main things Repubs were saying:

"Republicans said, “He promised unemployment below 8%!”

And now we have it, just in time for the elections. Countdown to Gilsan conspiracy mode 10, 9, 8 .......

I can see some of the new Obama ads now. Bunch of Republicans saying "He promised unemployment below 8%!” cut to 7.8% and then add in, there's more work to be done aka another 4 years.

Romney "bbutt, butt, we had fireworks yesterday" It also shows the stupidity of their campaign. That possibility for it to dip under 8% was there, why in the world would you use the 8% in ads, while campaigning, when it could come back and bite you?

7.8% when he went into office Jan 2009, jumping almost 3 points in Bush's last year, it was at 5% Jan 2008. That's called a major slide
all the way up 10%
now back down do 7.8% and trending lower

Stock market up

Housing market picking up again

I think we need some more of this.

 

[RogueWriter]

One of the main things Repubs were saying:

"Republicans said, “He promised unemployment below 8%!”

And now we have it, just in time for the elections.

And the timing of it is not suspicious to you, lol. You are so gullible, so willing to buy into party line. 41 months above 8%, but less than a month before the election, magically, voila, 7.8%. But not to worry, I am sure the number will be revised back up on november 8th or 9th.

Another first occurred today, a President bragged about 7.8% unemployment. Woohoo, part-aaaeh.

The government has hired 14,000 employees in the last two months, work it, Obama, work it. Hire another 20K for the government dole before the end of the month, maybe you can get the number down to 7.7% before the election.

 

[JB Lions]

haha, I expect that from Gilsan.

It's not a party line, it's a stat. It's a stat that you guys have been pushing...... until now, when the carpet just got pulled from underneath you. So now you're in conspiracy theory mode, it's pure hilarity.

Here's what I'm seeing on the news today:

Romney admitting being "completely wrong"

and

7.8%

It's over.

 

[GILSAN]

haha, I expect that from Gilsan.

It's not a party line, it's a stat. It's a stat that you guys have been pushing...... until now, when the carpet just got pulled from underneath you. So now you're in conspiracy theory mode, it's pure hilarity.

Here's what I'm seeing on the news today:

Romney admitting being "completely wrong"

and

7.8%

It's over.

You said it was over some time back
You said Obama was a much better debater than Romney
You said Biden will walk all over Ryan in the next debate
You will be eating your words next month

Anyone who knows simple maths will tell you that unemployment numbers are fairly easy to manipulate and that's not an exclusive to Democrats or Americans. Our Government here in Portugal also tries to do that, but fortunately our Media will not tolerate any Bullshit lies from any Political Party, unlike what's happening in the US.

When you count everyone that's not working in the US (23 million) then those unemployment numbers are probably much closer to 11-13%, if not more.

Isn't it true that the US needs to put out at least about 250.000 jobs to keep up with the pace of population growth? So how on earth can the unemployment rate conveniently drop 0.3% when 114.000 jobs were created?

The gullible 47% Obama supporters are going to believe these numbers, regardless of wether they are true or false. Since so many of them are dependent on Government for everything, it makes no difference to them if the unemployment is 5% or 15%, as long as they get their free cell phones, Nike's, Plasma TV's and other goodies.

Now I have a question: If Obama has created all these new jobs, how come 18 million more people are receiving food stamps, since he came to office?

Here's a great quote that's not mine but I just love:

"Recession is when your neighbor loses his job. Depression is when you lose your job, and RECOVERY is when Obama loses HIS job!" Clint Eastwood couldn't have said it better!

Here's an excellent article from Forbs that has a lot more details than what I've mentioned:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/charles...y-greatly-increasing-the-power-of-government/

As for Romney admitting he was "completely wrong", here are some quotes from very famous people:

"Mistakes are a great educator when one is honest enough to admit them and willing to learn from them"
by Alexander Solzhenitsyn

"Anyone who has never made a mistake has never tried anything new."
by Albert Einstein

"All men make mistakes, but only wise men learn from their mistakes."
by Winston Churchill

"The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing."
by John Powell

"Those who never make mistakes lose a great many chances to learn something"
by Mary Pickford

"Your best teacher is your last mistake."
by Ralph Nader

 

[JB Lions]

"Anyone who knows simple maths will tell you that unemployment numbers are fairly easy to manipulate"

Actually, that's not true. You saying that is merely displaying your ignorance on this subject. You can take some time, actually do a little research for once, and find out how those numbers come about. It's not something that can be manipulated, it's been calculated the same way for a long time, it's a number Romeny and Co. believe in, since they've been using it in ads, in speeches, in his closing at the debate.

They just went thru some of this on CNN, pretty interesting, how many people are involved in putting these numbers together.

And finding some random quotes, is not going to help Mr. Flip Flopper out any.

 

[RaiderGirl]

I like the reason Al Gore gave for Obama's bad performance, blaming it on thin air, that Romney had more time to adapt to the higher elevation than Obama did... LMAO. Not surprised really, it's as believable as global warming and Al Gore inventing the internet.

I completely agree with Gilsan on the point that "Obama was stripped naked for 90 minutes, without the protection of the Media and his "old faithful" the "Teleprompter" Well said.

My son who is 13 was watching the debate and he made several comments that Obama was not same person, My response to him was this is the first time in 4 years he was going to see the REAL Obama, the one without a teleprompter reading lines that were written for him, the one without a staged setting with people being used as props in the background, that most of everything he's seen in the past 4 years from Obama has been nothing but a facade.

When you cant defend the indefensible, your naturally going to lose, My concern before the debate was whether or not Romney was going to call him out on his record of the last years, in the first 10 minutes he did just that and more.

The best line from Obama out of the night;

“Jim, you may wanna move on to another topic.”

 

[GILSAN]

Unemployment Rate Plummets to 4.3%--For Government Workers

"The best news anywhere in the U.S. economy over the past three months has been in the government sector, where unemployment has dropped dramatically from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August to 4.3 percent in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The best news anywhere in the U.S. economy over the past three months has been in the government sector, where unemployment has dropped dramatically from 5.7 percent in July to 5.1 percent in August to 4.3 percent in September, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics."

It's all planned to conveniently arrive in October/November with these apparently good unemployment numbers

Read the rest here: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/unemployment-rate-plummets-43-government-workers

You mentioned "Stock market up" That's because Ben Bernanke has decided to print $60 Billion a month indefinitely. He wants to help Obama and also wants to save his own skin, because he knows Romney will show him the door and the way out, once he gets elected.

As part of the Liberal Media CNN will show mostly stuff that will benefit Obama. They don't fool me with their bias. There are many ways to manipulate unemployment figures.

 

[JB Lions]

insert teleprompter joke from 2008

"Obama was not same person" You saw those 2 people on stage and it was Obama who wasn't the same person? Not Willard the chameleon? lol, good stuff.

:p

 

[JB Lions]

Few charts, take a gander, last one for RogueWriter

The government has hired 14,000 employees in the last two months, work it, Obama, work it. Hire another 20K for the government dole before the end of the month, maybe you can get the number down to 7.7% before the election.

 

[GILSAN]

UW Madison Students: 'Unfair' That Obama Couldn't Use Teleprompter in Debate

The 2 video interviews were just great. Interesting to see these Liberal students and Obama supporters answers to the various questions. A must see!

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...President-Couldn-t-Use-Teleprompter-in-Debate

:gl: :o :red: :lol: :lol:

Interesting to note that one of the women interviewed had the exact same answer as JB Lions. She said: "maybe it was his anniversary, maybe he was tired?

I suppose she was just kidding... just like JB Lions

 

[verbster]

The other Liberal "Break Room" heavyweights went into silence mode, or maybe they flew to Alaska to make sure Verbster's blood pressure was OK

What is this fascination you have with my blood? Is it some kind of Portuguese thing?

I wasn't able to watch the first debate, so I didn't comment on it. Like most, I did watch an hour or two of analysis. Based purely on that exposure to the debate, I was disappointed with President Obama's performance. It didn't match his performance from four years ago. The majority consensus of pundits on both sides is that Governor Romney did very well. To that I say, "Good for him."

The second debate should be an interesting duel of strategies. That's the kind of stuff I look for in the presidential debates, the work and thought not spent on the actual words, which, except for the occassional ad-lib, is mostly the same stuff I've heard and read before. I watch their delivery . . . their mannerisms when they are both listening and speaking . . . what they do with their eyes and hands, their posture, subtle facial expressions or shoulder movement, stuff like that. I do listen to content, but mainly to see how the candidates prioritize what they deliver, where voice and tonal emphasis is placed and such. And I listen for the weasel words, everything from using soft descriptors like "potentially" and "possibly" to complete lines of soft topics--emotional double-speak for period of length that contains no example of substance (though I do enjoy comparing the persuasive techniques the candidates use when they have no tangible support of a topic.) That pretty much tells me what I need to know about a candidate.

I'm sure you do the same, probably much better than I can.

 

[GILSAN]

The second debate should be an interesting duel of strategies. That's the kind of stuff I look for in the presidential debates, the work and thought not spent on the actual words, which, except for the occassional ad-lib, is mostly the same stuff I've heard and read before. I watch their delivery . . . their mannerisms when they are both listening and speaking . . . what they do with their eyes and hands, their posture, subtle facial expressions or shoulder movement, stuff like that. I do listen to content, but mainly to see how the candidates prioritize what they deliver, where voice and tonal emphasis is placed and such. And I listen for the weasel words, everything from using soft descriptors like "potentially" and "possibly" to complete lines of soft topics--emotional double-speak for period of length that contains no example of substance (though I do enjoy comparing the persuasive techniques the candidates use when they have no tangible support of a topic.) That pretty much tells me what I need to know about a candidate.

I'm sure you do the same, probably much better than I can.

Wow! You can do all that and still listen to the debate? :tu: I'm impressed and quite frankly even though I do look out for many of the things you mention, both consciously and unconsciously, from what you say, I have to admit that you are much better than I am. :red: