|
|
Post by Maxflex on Nov 28, 2012 19:19:49 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by jayohen on Nov 28, 2012 21:00:59 GMT -8
~chuckle~you are quoting exit polls even though you have (in the old political forum we used to use) stated that exit polls aren't to be trusted as people may lie to throw off the pollsters. Frankly, i think that sort of outlook on humanity is terrible, But I'll take you at your word and must wonder why you now think they're acceptable. Additionally, Obama ran on Obamacare and he won Illinois by a margin of 57.5% to 40.8%, easily a landslide!  You assert Obama barely won the election, yet he had a greater share of the electorate than Reagan had in his 'landslide' of 1980. As for impotent, all I see is Republicans fleeing Norquists's pledge to not raise taxes like rats leaving a sinking ship. Enjoy your moment of peace and wonderment or whatever it is you're feeling as in short order you're going to be enjoying the societal benefit of tax hikes on a tiny percentage of taxpayers and the ensuing prosperity everybody gets from that...I'll leave you with this..."forgive me for noting that conservatives seem to believe that the rich will work harder if we give them more and the poor will work harder if we give them less." E.J.Dionne Jr |
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Nov 29, 2012 6:21:48 GMT -8
~chuckle~you are quoting exit polls even though you have (in the old political forum we used to use) stated that exit polls aren't to be trusted as people may lie to throw off the pollsters. Frankly, i think that sort of outlook on humanity is terrible, But I'll take you at your word and must wonder why you now think they're acceptable. Additionally, Obama ran on Obamacare and he won Illinois by a margin of 57.5% to 40.8%, easily a landslide! Nice to know you remember well, which does puzzle me when I see you make a statement here and I know full well you know better. But back to the polls, true a poll can not be trusted, due mainly to how the questions are asked and who chooses to answer them. Democrats seem more open to voicing there views and imposing there will on others then Republicans You assert Obama barely won the election, yet he had a greater share of the electorate than Reagan had in his 'landslide' of 1980. And your short term memory needs work, have I ever said it was a landslide? And I seem to recall an answer you once gave me which said while you might vote for someone, this does not mean you agree with them 100%. Which is what this poll seems to say about Obamacare. And you, my friend, at one time seem to live and breath by the poll. So I thought it might have meaning for you that even if he carried Ill. It does not mean Obamacare is wanted there it is current form. As for impotent, all I see is Republicans fleeing Norquists's pledge to not raise taxes like rats leaving a sinking ship. Not all by no means, but even if it was it shows to me Republicans are willing to work on the problem Obama helped create. ;D Enjoy your moment of peace and wonderment or whatever it is you're feeling as in short order you're going to be enjoying the societal benefit of tax hikes on a tiny percentage of taxpayers and the ensuing prosperity everybody gets from that...I'll leave you with this..."forgive me for noting that conservatives seem to believe that the rich will work harder if we give them more and the poor will work harder if we give them less." E.J.Dionne Jr Again, what happens when we run out of rich people? Do we raise the tax on congress for there ill-gotten gains? For that, only history will tell for sure. Of course you statement seems to say you want Socialism as your government. May I ask why you want to change ours? However your quote is a bit off, people will work to support themselves, there loved ones and family. The rich have a choice once there income is at a point where they feel no worries, feel no need to help there fellow man. That the rich can just place there money overseas and we all lose the tax income. As it is right now, the rich invest in others, helping to finance others ideals and plans. Granted it is not done for free, a return is hoped for and expected. And the government sees this and "grants" a tax loophole if the guy loses money. Mostly so that he will still invest in others and not just sit on his money where the government can only tax his interest and not the earnings of others who have a job from his investments. Of course, some people (Democrats mostly) see help as giving a man a fish so he can eat, others see it as teach a man to fish so he can feed himself. So where, pray tell, does welfare help anyone in the long run? |
|
|
|
Post by george1861 on Nov 29, 2012 7:21:47 GMT -8
The dumbmasses have only seen the candy part of ObamaCare, by the mid terms the nasty part of ObamaCare hopefully will be obvious, & with reduced turn out typical of mid terms the TEA Party types should get a good push.
|
|
|
|
Post by Maxflex on Nov 29, 2012 7:49:58 GMT -8
We can only hope. But I am not fully sure an all tea party would be better at mid terms. Or else they will received the blame come next Presidential election.
Some would call it blocking, while I see it as trying to live with in our means. After all, money should not come out of thin air or it loses all meaning. Which is why our rate of inflation keeps going up.
|
|
