DrDawkinstein Posted November 11, 2012 Author Posted November 11, 2012 The election is about the electorate. While that sounds plain and smile, most things are. What you said in the last sentence is usually true, but in some scary cases in history, it didn't hold true. Indeed. I should say "If they keep Bible-thumping and insist on rooting their ideals in hatred and ignorance, they *SHOULD* never win, no matter how good their economic plan looks."
Adam Posted November 11, 2012 Posted November 11, 2012 Indeed. I should say "If they keep Bible-thumping and insist on rooting their ideals in hatred and ignorance, they *SHOULD* never win, no matter how good their economic plan looks." You should have seen some of the billboards down here.
Doc Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 This election was about anything BUT the economy. But hey, when the country is in the shitter, we can at least be happy that women get free birth control pills, gays can marry, and illegals can continue to come into the country and get amnesty. Woo boy!
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 This election was about anything BUT the economy. But hey, when the country is in the shitter, we can at least be happy that women get free birth control pills, gays can marry, and illegals can continue to come into the country and get amnesty. Woo boy! Just curious, what was the unemployment rate when Bush took over in 2002? What was it when he left? Can you answer that?
meazza Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 This election SHOULD have been about the economy. HOWEVER, GOP candidates simply couldnt keep their ignorant and bigoted mouths shut long enough to seal the easy win. If they keep Bible-thumping and insist on rooting their ideals in hatred and ignorance, they'll never win, no matter how good their economic plan looks. Which gop candidates? I actually followed the primaries (for.some.odd reason) and the only candidate I wanted to see win the primaries was Romney because looking at his background, I knew he was much more moderate than he made himself out to be. That being said, I agree the gop has a lot of problems but it wasn't their candidate.
3rdnlng Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Just curious, what was the unemployment rate when Bush took over in 2002? What was it when he left? Can you answer that? Have you gotten curious enough to consider if Bush's policies worked to get us out of the economic shock of 9/11 and worked for several years until the crisis hit? Have you wondered if it was his policies that caused the crisis or something else? (BTW, Bush took office in January of 2001)
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Have you gotten curious enough to consider if Bush's policies worked to get us out of the economic shock of 9/11 and worked for several years until the crisis hit? Have you wondered if it was his policies that caused the crisis or something else? (BTW, Bush took office in January of 2001) I have already answered that question in another thread. Why don't you give Obama the same slack you gave Bush?
3rdnlng Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 I have already answered that question in another thread. Why don't you give Obama the same slack you gave Bush? What thread? Because I'm opposed to where he is taking this country.
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 What thread? Because I'm opposed to where he is taking this country. Did you slam Bush when he ran up the deficet? Or when the unemployment rate jumped up?
Adam Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Did you slam Bush when he ran up the deficet? Or when the unemployment rate jumped up? Was that President Bush or him and the Congress that also was elected. I can't remember.
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Was that President Bush or him and the Congress that also was elected. I can't remember. To be honost, it was both. The president doesn't have as much say so in the economy as some would leave you to believe.
Cinga Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 To be honost, it was both. The president doesn't have as much say so in the economy as some would leave you to believe. Yeah, I was young and naive at one time too... The POTUS holds what we call "veto"power. He/she (someday) can "veto" any bill that comes before them. If they do, it then requires 2/3 vote of Congress to over ride that "veto".... Doesn't have much say??? HE/SHE as an individual, holds the same power as 535 members of Congress.... and your an ......
Adam Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Yeah, I was young and naive at one time too... The POTUS holds what we call "veto"power. He/she (someday) can "veto" any bill that comes before them. If they do, it then requires 2/3 vote of Congress to over ride that "veto".... Doesn't have much say??? HE/SHE as an individual, holds the same power as 535 members of Congress.... and your an ...... You can't create the bill to sign or veto. There is power. It is different, but definitely not equal.
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Yeah, I was young and naive at one time too... The POTUS holds what we call "veto"power. He/she (someday) can "veto" any bill that comes before them. If they do, it then requires 2/3 vote of Congress to over ride that "veto".... Doesn't have much say??? HE/SHE as an individual, holds the same power as 535 members of Congress.... and your an ...... I was talking the economy in general. He doesn't hire or fire. He is limited when it comes to jobs. That's why I think it is silly to blame the president for the economy. That goes for both parties.
3rdnlng Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 Did you slam Bush when he ran up the deficet? Or when the unemployment rate jumped up? If you are not going to look for root causes and discuss what's behind things then I have no desire to waste anymore of my time with you.
sodbuster Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 I was talking the economy in general. He doesn't hire or fire. He is limited when it comes to jobs. That's why I think it is silly to blame the president for the economy. That goes for both parties. He creates the environment for hiring. to say he doesn't is... ignorant.
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 He creates the environment for hiring. to say he doesn't is... ignorant. I believe your comment to be ignorant. We can still have a discussion though. Tell me where I am wrong. I don't have much in the way of an ego.
sodbuster Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 (edited) I believe your comment to be ignorant. We can still have a discussion though. Tell me where I am wrong. I don't have much in the way of an ego. I believe we are already discussing supply side economics on another thread. But things like ACA don't exactly create the conditions for mass hiring. Edited November 12, 2012 by sodbuster
outsidethebox Posted November 12, 2012 Posted November 12, 2012 I believe we are already discussing supply side economics on another thread. But things like ACA don't exactly create the conditions for mass hiring. I am in no way an expert in ACA, but is that a fact or an opinion. If it is a fact, please explain.
Recommended Posts