Magox

Nevermind trendlines, they don't matter. Merry Christmas to you too

This doesn't surprise me one bit, everything I've read about him from real personal accounts from friends, coworkers and parishioners has said that he was always an unusually selfless person.

1) Rebrand the party for the 21st century 2) Take on Immigration Reform and become much more inclusive to the Latino population. I wrote about this many times on this board well before the elections and received a lot of resistance from my conservative friends. 3) Stop nominating loons as Senate Candidates Oh and I was one of the people on this board that thought that the polling numbers skewed heavily towards Democrats. Well I was off by a mile

Yeah, unfortunately I am. Well, from my perspective I feel like most things are overpriced. That the markets are/were too confident that something would get resolved. But with the power of printing presses it seems to distort everything. So I'm not really sure. But if we happen to be correct and we fall into a technical recession than you would think that the market would drop. Typically as a rule of thumb, recessions = 20% drops from highs. I don't know

Gas prices are near records for this time of the year, food prices set to soar, tuitions continuing to rise at ridiculous levels, health insurance premiums still rising rapidly.. But The CPI says there is nothing to worry about. So, just forget about what it is that you actually spend some of your money on and go by the CPI

Joe Scarborough is a conservative. He just happens to work on MSNBC and he has to appeal to his audience.

Boehner had a nearly impossible task.. He's got a house that is dominated by a number of fiscal hawks and a W.H that predominantly fears its base. We're probably at the very least heading into a mild recession. Maybe I will be wrong, won't be the first or last time.

Typical... Most people entrenched in their partisan views..... The reality is there is no silver bullet solution or for that matter, multipile solutions that will eliminate the risk of psychos offing innocent people.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74163.html#ixzz2Fz5IQFTG

I think what matters most is if people get the sense that we are moving in the right direction. There is alot of anxiety out there, and going into that jobs report, the ones who usually decide the outcome the swing voters were on the mend. If the economy shows similar results to what we've been seeing over the past month, than Romney most likely wins. Florida and NC now show Romney in the lead according to RCP and Ohio according to Rasmussen is showing Romneys first lead there since last year. Even Colorado, Iowa and Nevada according to NBC's latest polls which have shown a heavier democratic sampling than other polls show a virtual tie here. All the polls have shown a dramatic tightening over the past two months. It appears to me that the economy is gonna be weak over the next few months, and that only Reinforces Romneys argument, which is that "Obama is not up to the task, I am, I'm the fixit guy". Remember, Romney needs Indiana which he'll get, North Carolina which looks likely, Florida where ROmney now has the lead, and then Ohio, Virginia and one other state, that could either be Iowa, NH, Colorado, Wisconsin, PA or Nevada. I would say, that when the polls come out about a week from now, you will see Romney with evens stronger poll numbers.

Lets leave motives aside. If someone needs an ID to buy cigarrette and alcohol, then I believe it is completely legitimate to require ID to help decide the course of direction of the city/state/country. This is long past due, it's time to make the sensible decision.

What I can't understand is how hasn't this been a law to begin with? Yes I know, it was "Civils rights" sort of deal back in the 50/60's, but that was then, this is now. Lets just get it right, it will have to be done some time, and no better time than now. And in regards to your claim that it isn't a problem, how do you know? That's like saying a teacher only caught 2 students all year cheating on their tests in class, so since there were only two people caught, it's not a problem. Well, that just doesn't fly in the face of reason, what about all the kids that did cheat who didn't get caught? I can assure you, there are a whole lot more people getting away with **** than those who get caught. So, I reject the premise of the case that you are making. And I also reject that you believe that all the motives from these people is to suppress turnout. Are there some people who's main objective is to suppress turnout? For sure. Are there people who have an honest desire to ensure that they limit voter fraud? Without a doubt. This is a common sense solution, and there is no rational basis to object to it, other than questioning peoples motives, which as I said is disprovable. I support this idea, does that mean that I want to suppress voter turnout?

I've seen signs of a possible slow down over the past few months, and it seems as if it is pretty much confirmed, the question is how long will it last? From my estimations, the slow down here domestically speaking began almost two to three months ago. ISM, Factory orders, Chicago PMI, consumer confidence, weekly jobless claims, the unemployment report and a whole host of other reports suggest that we will continue to cool down. What was especially bad about those jobs numbers wasn't even so much the lousy numbers for May, but the dramatic revisions for the month prior. JA brought up a point the other day that he believed the lowering of Oil prices would be a good thing for the president, and it is to a degree, but I argued that if the price of oil went down to $85 a barrel that it would indicate possible fractures in the economy, and that if oil came down, then so would stocks, and that is precisely what happened. With China continuing to slow down and utter chaos and uncertainty in Europe, the external forces that were helping grow our exporting manufacturing base (primarily coming from China,India) now seems that it won't be an engine of growth for our exporters. Again, how long will China, India and Brazil continue to cool down? To be honest, I really don't know, but I would guess at least for a few more months, until China's stimulus kicks in, which they have shown that they are quite efficient when implementing these measures. Europe is a disaster, there is no good outcome over there. The only outcomes are either really bad or catastrophic and anything in between. So the uncertainty and depressed growth rates over there will serve as a negative for what happens over here. Then there is the "fiscal cliff", since it appears that neither the president or the house republicans have any desire in compromising on this serious issue, it looks like the best possible scenario we could possibly see is that at some point, months from now, we get an extension of current policies until a president is decided after the elections. In the meantime, this will be yet another layer of uncertainty that will cloud over US corporations and small businesses which of course will create another obstacle for Job hiring. So what are the possible implications for the presidency? I would of said going into the May Jobs report, that Romney stood a 50/50 chance, I would say that his odds of winning have gone up. I may be wrong, but I believe we are going to have really weak economic numbers for at least the next three months. Now of course, these ultra low interest rates could spur more lending (doubtful but possible), these low oil prices could help consumers who don't have 401ks and stocks have more disposable income, which in turn creates more demand for certain goods and services and then of course the Federal Reserve could come in with another round of QE (Which I believe is highly likely) and that could jump start the stock market again, helping create another manufactured wealth effect, that could in turn increase consumer confidence. Of course another round of QE would most likely increase oil and gasoline prices, so that is a double edged sword. If what I believe will happen, which is stagnant growth, and subpar employment numbers, then that will increase Romney's chances of winning this fall. He has already dramatically made headway over the past two months, my guess is that the polling numbers will continue to go his way.

From my perspective, the intentions are a secondary issue that is virtually disprovable one way or another. If we are going to elect people who have tremendous power, so much power that it affects peoples lives, then what matters most is that we get it right and that we do everything that we reasonably can to limit fraud. Asking someone for a freaking ID isn't unreasonable!

No its not that, its just that if you see a dipshit, you call them out for being one, dipshit.

It's not just a "supply side" argument, it is about certainty and unleashing the animal spirits of American capitalism. The key to getting this economy going is motivating corporations to unleash those trillions of dollars that are sitting on the sidelines. Burdensome nonsensical regulations, and the least competitive corporate tax rates in the world don't help. If you (the president) can somehow give added certainty by providing a long-term plan to reduce the debt, lower personal and corporate tax rates and broadening the base, and sending a signal to the business community that you are on their side by undoing some of these ridiculous regulations, corporations and small businesses will begin to hire. Of course, it doesn't address all our structural labor issues, but it would at least turn this "recovery" from an anemic one to bordering on average. Keynesian demand side solutions are useful to help jump start an economy, or help fill a void, the problem is that isn't a structural solution. It's temporary, and corporations and small businesses know that it will eventually run out. So we need permanent long-term solutions, not these short-term sugar highs.

Romney is the only one who has repeatedly pushed for reforming the entitlements out of the two.

Your view is too singularly myopic. In your first paragraph, you are making the case that without sales, nothing else matters. Well yeah, but that isn't the case, there are sales. Again, the argument you make is either black or white. White being red hot sales, black being none at all. The reality is that sales are below what we normally see in a normal economy, and the only way we will get back to a normal economy is through higher employment. We know that profits from corporations aren't the problem, the issues is getting corporations to spend that money. So the million dollar question is; Why aren't they spending and investing that money? It's simple, you can either read WSJ, tune into CNBC and apply a little logic and hear what the CEO's are saying or you can read HUFFPO or the spin from the Whitehouse and congressional Democrats. I guarantee you, that if you listen to what the Dem's are saying or hear the spin from keynesian economists that promoted the stimulus (like a Mark Zandi) and have time in and time out been proven wrong on almost all their projections, then you are going to continue to never find the right solution. Guys like Mark Zandi feel as if their reputation is on the line, they heavily promoted the stimulus and have defended itwith incredible zeal, so they are stuck attempting to justify their error. (BTW I am not an anti keynesian, just that this recovery requires structural solutions) I'm right about this, and the solution isn't the typical left-wing or keynesian one which is the standard "we need more demand" answer. What we need are structural solutions, why? Because structural labor problems require structural solutions. Before you came to this site, I spoke in detail about why Obama's demand side solutions wouldn't work, and this was before the failing results came in, and I've been proven right. What we need is to give confidence to the business community, both at the corporate and small business level, that the US is open for business, and that Government for the most part is on your side. How do we do that? Well, you lessen regulations, you allow businesses to keep more of what they earn, you seek new avenues of demand for our exporters by improving trade relations with growing companies and most importantly don't get in the way of their progress. Obama is incapable of making the economy thrive, he isn't up to the task, why? Because it isn't in his DNA, he is a community organizer, he cares more about "fairness", and even though that is nice concept that appeals to some people, it by no means is a way to reinvigorate an economy. "fairness" economic models are built through regulations and wealth distribution, and these two points that I listed are job and growth restrictors. What we need to do is figure out a way for those corporations and businesses to spend and invest that money, that is the key to getting this economy going, and guess what? It won't cost the taxpayer money because it is money that is just sitting their owned by the private sector. In regards to the housing market, there is no quick fix solution. Let the market find it's bottom, stop placing ball buster regulations on the banks in the name of populism and at some point, the prices of the homes (which we are about there) will be attractive enough for buyers to step in. So it's just a matter of the banks having enough confidence to lend again. But if regulations are going to cut further into profits, does that make it more or less likely they will loan money to consumers? The answer is obvious. In regards to Romney and Obama, there is plenty of difference between the two. SOrry, I don't buy into this vogue comparison that there isn't much of a difference between the two. People can try to justify all day long how these two are similar but they are nothing alike. Romney will work tirelessly in figuring out a way for businesses to get going, Obama works tirelessly in building a more "fair" economy. That is an incredibly stark contrast in how these two men will promote policies to move this country forward.

First you can't make that comparison, at least not from a rational basis. The economy we had in 2003-2007 is vastly different than what it is now. We need to reinvigorate the private sector, unleash the animal spirits, and demand is obviously a part of the equation, but in order to produce more demand you have to get people working again. The WhiteHouse believes that we should borrow money and produce a job with that money. THe problem is that Gov. is usually very inefficient when given that responsibility, as evidenced in the Stimulus Bill. Considering that our labor issues are mainly structural, we need to try to resolve these issues not with quick keynesian quick fixes but with structural solutions. Considering that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, addressing this issue is extremely important. The president has decided to push for the Buffet Tax, that is a political gimmick in order to rile up his looney leftist base, than actually solve our problems of addressing our tax code. Secondly, leftists which you aren't a full blown leftist, but you definitely reside on the left side of the aisle, refuse to acknowledge the impact of regulations and how that affects business behavior. Businesses first and fore most crave certainty. Without a doubt, regulatory impacts of Dodd-Frank (Im a casualty of this regulation), Obamacare and the EPA have dampened certainty. ALso, we know that under a second Obama term, Obama will push for punitive taxes on the job creators in the name of "fairness". This is what I see as the number one issue standing in the way from our anemic growth to having average growth. Other areas that need to be addressed is ramping up oil/energy drilling, there are literally millions of jobs that can be created over the next 5-10 years if we decided to have full blown energy policy. Of course, having better relations with our trading partners an area that can lead to more exports would be fruitful. There are many areas that we can go, but this president has failed to address these areas, simply because its not in his DNA, he is incapable of doing what needs to be done to get ths economy going again. In regards to your housing solution. I disagree. The gov. should do nothing, and just allow the market to find its natural bottom, the quicker it finds its bottom, the quicker the healing can begin. The more you inject "stimulus" the more it distorts its natural price, which means the healing gets postponed. ANd in regards to your personal situation, well, you are one of the below 40% of the population that can say the same. I'm in the 60%, I lost my business because of the DOdd Frank Regulation, I am a direct casualty of Obamas awful economic policies, so again, good for you, I'm happy that you are doing well, but most AMericans don't feel your enthusiasm.

So that's what you got out of that website? Like I said, that's how you approach things, by using the "la la la la, I can't hear you, la la la" tack. There was a whole lot more than just cut and tax thats on that website, but you selectively decide to ignore the rest. That's just a reflection of either your lack of desire to want to know his plans are or your inability to comprehend what is in there. It's only one of the two, which is it? You stubbornly refuse to acknowledge his plans, or you simply can't comprehend what he is saying? Sorry, sensible thinking business people dont agree with you. What you consider "far right" is what the business community including corporations consider a pro growth and pro jobs agenda. But go ahead, keep living in insulated leftist ideologue world, if thats what makes you feel more comfortable, than I'm all for it.

You are one lazy dude. http://www.mittromney.com/jobs That wasn't so hard was it?

He has, but you're deaf and you would rather just go "la la la la, I can't hear you, la la la la la"

Although I do agree with some of what you are saying, your view is too simplistic, a defeatist perspective, that basically implies a black or white scenario, tilting heavily towards black. The reality is that there are many shades of grey in between and that there are policy prespriptions that can lead us to a long-term solution by incrementally leading us to lighter shades of grey. The president and his staff is a team comprised of a bunch of leftist ideologues, early on my criticism was that his administration had virtually no one that had private sector experience, and that I knew from the beginning that the Obama Whitehouse would be incapable of leading us to a solid sustained recovery, and guess what? Some of us were right. There is over two trillion dollars sitting on the sidelines from corporations, and if the president had any sort of business sense, he would work tirelessly in how to have them unleash and spend that money. But rather than do that, he is more concerned with the politics of "fairness" which contradicts in what makes a business want to grow. Even if you look past the corporations and them hoarding money through fear of uncertainty and higher taxes, small business polls show that regulations is what is inhibiting job hiring, not lack of demand. The president has failed and it's time for someone who actually understands business to finish the job he couldn't handle.

But but they killed Bin Laden.

Thanks to Obamas "Growth" Policies, he has successfully lowered the price of Gasoline over the past month. On a more related note to the original point of the thread, what I like what the Romney campaign is doing is that they are taking the fight to the Obama administration, this isn't like the McCain campaign, where McCain played mr. nice guy allowing himself to get bludgeoned by the Obama hit squad. That's what they thought was going to happen, they fully expected Romney to just take it, and they aren't doing that. The strategy is smart, it helps consolidate and galvanize the base in the early stages, solidifying and hardening support to help create passion and troops on the ground and as the campaign moves forward, more of the swing voters will begin to tune in and then at that point he can begin to pivot more to the middle, by touting his bipartisan record in MA, which is something that moderates and independents like hearing, which is something that the president has massively failed at during his presidency. http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/mitt-romney-fighting-moderate-wins-over-the-righ And with the lousy economy that Obama is incapable of turning around the way it should be, it's gonna make Mitt's job that much easier.