And:
Perhaps more significantly, Democratic interest in the campaign has soared. For the first time, those in the president’s party are following the campaign as closely as GOP voters.
September 8, 2012
Obama 46%, Romney 44%.
The Rasmussen tracking poll shows Obama got some bounce — bouncing back to where he was just before the GOP convention, that is, bouncing back over Romney's bounce.
And:
And:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
269 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 269 of 269Ritmo - name me more then 1 person on this blog who denies evolution.
Who cares? It's immoral to lie and endlessly pander to a philosophy that furthers ignorance on the part of the country.
Who needs to worry about a GOP congress when you can appoint czars and resort to executive orders.
Which administration first appointed a "czar"?
Which administration first appointed a "czar"?
So, you're pro 'czar'?
A drug czar?
An energy czar?
Heck, Republicans at one point even appointed a food czar.
So what are you saying, LilyBart?
Informal titles can't be used for high-ranking officials in presidential administrations?
Talk about the biggest waste of air over a complete non-issue.
PS Whatever the fluctuations of the polls, I'm (more often than not) optimistic about Romney/ Ryan's chances. Those two are formidable men, well equipped to meet the challenge, not to be underestimated. Doesn't mean I don't feel anxiety. But then, I really didn't believe Walker would win in WI, until (to my great relief) he did.
ANd you've also thrown in with a crowd that disbelieves: Evolution, Female biology, Climate science, Macroeconomics, Finance. Talk about anti-science.
Oh, brother. My eyes are rolling so hard they're rolling out of their sockets.
It's not what the czars are called, it's what the czars do. E.g. the czars at the EPA.
Keep 'em rolling, yashu.
Ritmo doesn't even have his D-game.
--I'm with the people who complain about how way too many people go to college. We've created degrees and curricula for made-up bullshit that means nothing and requires no thought.--
Who's this "we" Kimosabe?
That's your side.
If you're not competitive, it won't return. And your belief in MMGW and all the regs you want doesn't help.
Female biology? Your side as well.
Your side spent decades trying to prove there aren't differences between males & females. That pesky science.....
O Ritmo Segundo said...
An armchair history major said,
Even if one were to buy your line of bullshit the answer is still yes, because we are capable of learning from our mistakes whereas those other idiots can't learn from theirs. Ahh the left. Still stuck on stupid for nearly two hundred years.
Please cite a policy mistake made by the American "left" within the last two hundred years. And who counts as left-wing in 1860? In 1780?
Which party held the reins of government during the decades preceding The Great Depression? During the decades preceding The Great Recession?
9/8/12 2:56 PM
Try reading. You might learn something. By the way you confuse parties with ideologies. True they often track but they are not always fixed in stone. FYI: Herbert Hoover was a progressive. He instituted progressive policies that took a stock market crash and turned in it a depression followed by one FDR who lied his ass off as a fiscal conservative while running for president and once in office doubled down on progressive stupidity. Notice how the democrats are railing against offshoring and fair trade... well if they had a clue they would realize that the republicans were once dumb enough to do just that. It was the Smoot-Hawley Act. That turned out rather badly.
As for policy mistakes, anything rooted in Marxism is a policy mistake. It was obvious when he wrote his works and more obvious now. It takes someone stuck on stupid not to realize that.
Question that I am going to ask Nate S. from NYT. HOw many here know the answer?
Which states do not require you to register for any party? SO, you can vote as a D, R, or I.
What is the answer?
NB: The states where no party registration is in place is where Obama defeats Romney by 20%.
Jay: Isn't it funny you only reference polls confirming your biases?
I heard it widely acknowledge, including by Republicans and including on Fox News, that the polls show Romney got no bounce. Obama did get a bounce, and if you look at the Drudge Report right now the headline is that the latest poll shows Obama at 49% and Romney at 44%, so Obama's extending his lead this weekend. Don't blame me that your party can't find good candidates. Bill Clinton made mince meat out of all the bullshit we've been hearing from Republicans.
And I strongly believe that the consequences of a second Obama term (just like the consequences of the first) will ultimately worst affect the poor and middle class, and least affect the very rich.
E.g., more "welfare" is sorry compensation for a quicksand of terminal unemployment. And when the money runs out (as it will) for certain entitlements, it's the poor, not the rich, who'll be left in the lurch.
"glad you got your mojo back"
lol no need for AP to waste any mojo here.
>
And good to see mittens is wasting time and $$$ in PA/MI/WI although the "trickle down" may stimulate their economies a tad ...
Again, Alex talkin' about someone's game is slightly amusing. The poor, confused pup that he is.
btw, ((( never say never !!! )))
LoafingOaf,
Don't blame me that your party can't find good candidates.
And you've got one?
Oh man, are you guys trippin'....
LoafingOaf said...
I heard it widely acknowledge, including by Republicans and including on Fox News, that the polls show Romney got no bounce. Obama did get a bounce, and if you look at the Drudge Report right now the headline is that the latest poll shows Obama at 49% and Romney at 44%, so Obama's extending his lead this weekend.
Ras gave the Romster a 6 point bounce, Zero only gets 3 (withing MOE).
The Oaf quotes Gallup, which is still doing registered voters nad has been leaned on by the DOJ for not being co-operative enough.
I'll still take Ras.
shiloh said...
And good to see mittens is wasting time and $$$ in PA/MI/WI although the "trickle down" may stimulate their economies a tad ..
And before he chortled, " mittens has given up on PA/MI/WI".
Guess not.
And how about a few words on how
Choomie has given up on NC?
Maybe something about how Zero has to run ads in IL?
And it can't be for anybody down ballot. He's publicly abandoned them.
And they've abandoned him. How many office holders stayed away from Charlotte because they didn't want to be tainted by Zero's Black Hand of Death?
O Ritmo wrote:
Alex thinks that forcing grandparents to work is the indicator of a great economy.
You know what's not a great indicator of an economy? A 8.5% unemployment rate, with more and more people simply dropping out of the workforce since there are no jobs to work at, and nothing on the horizon. So before you get all huffy and puffy at repubs for wanting grandma to work till she drops lets at least acknowledge that under your guys economy she probably wont work till she drops because she'll be fired.
Thw fact that things are so close even with a horrible economy and a President most moderates, independents, to almost every conservative has serious doubts about is not a slam on Romney, Mccain as much as it is about huge public doubt about hoary old Repubican ideas that equal the doubts about 60s big government liberalism.
To whit:
1. Tax cuts, especially for the Jobs Creators (richest 1%) create jobs. 12 years of 0 job growth under Bush II and Obama show it is a lie.
2. Free trade gives us new great jobs and boosts our standard of living. (A lie).
3. Trickledown from the noble Jobs Creators flows abundantly to the other 99% of Americans. (Republican lie).
4. If we only embrace Freedom!! and let Wall Street and the Financial community self-regulate...why, Reagan's idea will lead to the land of milk and honey!! No way will the Hero bankers and Wall Street CEOs cut their own throats.
5. Nothing helps America's future like foreign overreach and wars of adventure and nation-building!!
C4 - what is your Rx for fixing the economy so everyone has a job and a chicken in every pot?
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Ritmo - name me more then 1 person on this blog who denies evolution.
Who cares? It's immoral to lie and endlessly pander to a philosophy that furthers ignorance on the part of the country.
9/8/12 3:14 PM
You mean like believing in fantasy energy and clinging to discredited economic theories? Carry on.
--And good to see mittens is wasting time and $$$ in PA/MI/WI although the "trickle down" may stimulate their economies a tad ...--
Didn't you say somewhere else Romney is not advertising in those states?
--You know what's not a great indicator of an economy? A 8.5% unemployment rate, with more and more people simply dropping out of the workforce since there are no jobs to work at, and nothing on the horizon. So before you get all huffy and puffy at repubs for wanting grandma to work till she drops lets at least acknowledge that under your guys economy she probably wont work till she drops because she'll be fired--
Then Obamacare will offer her a pill.
Alex said...
C4 - what is your Rx for fixing the economy so everyone has a job and a chicken in every pot?
9/8/12 4:23 PM
He doesn't have one except for income redistribution for the right sort of white people.
I had a dream that Obama won and all of the dire predictions came true about the end of the Republic and then Obama peeled-off his latex face and changed his clothes for fur pelts and turned into Thulsa Doom and "they" came for me and my family.
That was kinda okay - an interesting dream. Nothing too spectacular. I have dreams like that a lot.
But then I had a nightmare!
With absolute clarity, so much so it's SEARED into my brain, I could see myself in a "re-education" camp and on the first day of "Love Thulsa Doom" instruction, the door to my classroom opened and in walked Ritmo!!
OMG, Ritmo is my instructor! And there's no syllabus! He just makes it up as he goes!!!
Althouse con lemmings have not given up on mittens!
To wit:
All the foolish/delusional con posts at this blog ...
As per usual.
Here's the way I see it.
1) Polling has baked-in assumptions of party identification to weight the samples. If those are wrong, they aren't accurate.
2) Liberals who are pleased with the polling results showing a bounce for Obama should note that the same polling shows an increase for the GOP in the House, Senate, and among Governors. If Democrat policies are really the driving force for Obama's re-election numbers, would that be the case? If not, what's going on?
3) The polling results showing Obama's lead are also mostly showing "registered voters". There are many registered voters who do not vote. "Likely voters" polls tend toward fewer Democrat votes, and tend to mirror the final result more closely. A small Obama lead among registered voters is not a lead at all.
4) The MSM boycotted many speeches by minorities at the GOP convention. They followed the pre-determined talking point of "lies". Then they turned around and gushed about the Democrat convention. The tone of reporting was different. I think that explains the bounce.
5) It will be more difficult for the MSM to skew reporting in Obama's favor in the debates.
6) Obama is playing defense in the electoral college ground game. States in play include Florida, NC, Ohio (all weakly for Romney right now), Colorado, Virginia, Iowa, Nevada, and even New Hampshire, Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin!
7) It isn't a good sign for Obama that he has already abandoned North Carolina.
8) Romney has more cash available than Obama. Obama outspent Romney by a large margin going into the conventions. Now that Romney has accepted the nomination, he can start spending more and using that money advantage to make his case.
9) The money advantage means Romney can use ad buys and internet vids to bypass the MSM and reach voters directly.
10) The Wisconsin model should scare Democrats: polling showed them tied or with a slight lead, but on the recall election day, voting for Walker was so high it was obviously over extremely early.
11) The stridency of ritmo, shiloh, lindsey, garage, et al, and how they refuse to address facts to continue pushing their narrative shows Democrats are scared.
12) This is actually a stupid move on Democrats' part. They believe they have to depress the GOP vote to have a chance to win. All it does is make broken glass voters like myself work harder to GOTV and campaign for the GOP.
13) Despite the GOP already having a lead in the House and among governors, and at the state level legislatures, this may end up being another wave election. Can you imagine the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left if the GOP makes another set of gains as large as in 2010?
11) The stridency of ritmo, shiloh, lindsey, garage, et al, and how they refuse to address facts to continue pushing their narrative shows Democrats are scared.
THIS.
"Which party held the reins of government during the decades preceding The Great Depression? During the decades preceding The Great Recession?"
I guess you don't count the Wilson fascist administration ? The "Great Recession" was preceded by an empire consisting of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac run by former Clinton officials like Frank Raines and MS Chinese Wall Gorelick. Not mention Robert Johnson, the chief culprit who was Obama's VP search team chief until his role in Fannie Mae was ;publicized.
I'm not the least surprised you know nothing about this.
By the way, Alex, it's nice to see you posting more often as "yourself" (a "pragmatic libertarian").
It's funny that your schizomobying often really annoys me, but in fact (I think, if your self-description was sincere) we're probably not too far apart politically.
Thanks to Cubanbob, I have now learned that:
1. Calvin Coolidge was a "progressive".
2. Democrats are railing against fair trade.
3. The sun does not provide energy. Neither does the wind.
These must be examples of the "facts" that Nathan Alexander claims I am too scared to address.
Ritmo doesn't want to talk about that fascist Woodrow Wilson.
Michael K, too, conveniently pretends that the "business-friendly" Calvin Coolidge never existed, and that the Wilson administration didn't end in 1921. Instead it ran right through to the crash of 1929.
Thanks for the "facts", KKKons.
What the hell does Woodrow Wilson have to do with "The Roaring Twenties" and the ensuing crash/depression?
Oh yeah. Absolutely nothing. Other than that it provides cover for people gullible enough to create raging gaps in their supposed historical "knowledge".
The stridency of ...
False.
Strident always.
Thanks for the "facts", KKKons.
Lovely.
Thanks for the "facts", KKKons.
Lovely.
Standard leftist discussion tactic.
Everyone knows the GOP in 1929 is exactly the same as 2012. Nothing changed.
The real question is how closely dead people are following this election, and how many of them are likely to vote.
What in the world is "female biology?" Now I am assuming (always dangerous) that the author was probably referring to the idiotic comments made by the Akin fellow in Missouri. Other than that that the broader topic is human biology wherein males and females do differ considerably in terms of things like function, hormones, physiology and a host of other things. Can someone explicate "female biology" for me? Seems to me that humans share the same basic biology, but there are clearly some differences based on gender. Mr Akin's asinine comments notwithstanding.
Everyone knows the GOP in 1929 is exactly the same as 2012. Nothing changed.
Certainly not their lust for the same policies that got us into both situations.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Thanks to Cubanbob, I have now learned that:
1. Calvin Coolidge was a "progressive".
2. Democrats are railing against fair trade.
3. The sun does not provide energy. Neither does the wind.
These must be examples of the "facts" that Nathan Alexander claims I am too scared to address.
9/8/12 5:02 PM
Thanks again for demonstrating that you are a willful idiot. The decade preceding 1920's governed by the racist and fascist-democrat Wilson whose term ended in march 1921. But that is too difficult for you to understand.
I said Herbert Hoover was a progressive so you lie instead by saying Calvin Coolidge.
"Fair trade" as in restricted trade. They for it not against it, as I said.
Wind and solar power: Wow! What genius! Really a wind powered car or a solar powered car? Really you are beyond stupid. You haven't a clue of what is energy density, storability and scalability. But you do go on snarkily parading you invincible ignorance and stupidity. Now wonder you are an Obama supporter.
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Everyone knows the GOP in 1929 is exactly the same as 2012. Nothing changed.
Certainly not their lust for the same policies that got us into both situations.
9/8/12 5:46 PM
Gee thats too funny! Obama is trying to enact Hoover's policies!
These people posting it's OK if Obama wins have deluded themselves, a divided government won't be able to do anything but be tax collectors for Obamacare and the debt crisis that will hit America in the next 3 years, on top of a stagnate econmy, already high employment, that won't get better, if Carter had been elected for a second term the economy wouldn't have boomed, without Reagan's up ending the tax code and regulatory system in the country and under Obama it will be only more taxes , nothing says growth like taxes.
Obama isn't Bill Clinton, Obama's a hard left ideologue , Clinton is pragmatic whore, he would have never rammed Hillarycare once the country spoke that's why Clinton moved centre right, while Obama just became more hard left.
Once Obamacare comes into effect, the dynamic between citzen and government won't be anything that it is now, in 2014 Obamcare exchanges begin ,the costs will explode 10 times more then bullshit esitmates, and 35 to 40 % more middle class will be dumped onto the exchanges ie ( Medicade) from their employer.
Obamacare is just the method the left using to force the middle class having the healthcare as the poor, an the left politicians ( ie) them wouldn't be effected.
With deficits unheard of already 10% of GDP , a debt that's over 100%GDP and the Obamacare costs on top of the baby boomer retiring in the next couple of years, a freight train will hit America, that liberals and media are conning Americans into ignoring.
That's why they used Clinton, the left is 35% and prepared to be as chameleon as it takes to reel in, from the culture they dominate, the additional 15 percent or so needed to push their guy across the finish line, and Clinton to win the democrats love and media's praises has no problem selling his soul, once a pragmatist whore ...
1. End Free Trade for wealthy freedom lovers by slapping a VAT tax on manufactured goods at the EU rate (15%) or Chinese rate (17%).
Use the receipts to allocate up to 18-20% to pay the miliary costs of keeping trade routes open, the rest goes into paying off principal on the Debt,
2. Tax cuts for the "jobs creators" creating jobs was a lie, so was Trickledown. Go back to the tax rates of high growth/high job creation America in the 50s, 60s, and 90s.
Most of Reagan's Voodoo economics was a lie. Job growth in the 80s had more to do with taming inflation, a period of stability in the world, and new technology especially IT creating huge gains in productivity that the wealthiest had a hard time keeping only for themselves.
3. Reduce business taxes. Offer the best deals to businesses that create abundant jobs. Add far higher fees for H1-B workers....preferred by the wealthy "jobs creators" over supporting the training and education costs of young American workers.
5, 6 other things....
But the main point is the "Reagan is God and all his ideas from 30 years ago are still fabulous!!" faction of Republicans fail to get that most the country thinks those ideas are as discredited (thanks to Bush-Obama) as LBJs Great Society.
Roberto:
The Depression started in 1929. This was right after Coolidge left office. Hoover didn't "start" a depression, he presided over it as the end-result of policies that led to it, enacted under the "laissez faire" Coolidge, took effect.
Unless you hate history and disbelieve cause and effect and believe that economics is not contingent upon past economic activity, then you are free to believe that Hoover somehow singlehandedly "caused" the crash all by his own and without the benefit of the economic environment that was structured by the previous man who held the office (although Woodrow Wilson, two administrations removed, certainly doesn't escape blame somehow! That's quite an intellectual feat! Blame the guy two administrations ago but not the one who had spent the last eight years neglecting everything.)
I don't understand why AP keeps avoiding kneading the dough in the pizza joint he was bragging about opening. Could it be it was all a ruse?
Small correction:
Coolidge was president (5) years, (7) mos.
Can't really blame Harding for anything as he was totally out of the loop until his death.
Mencken was talkin' about Harding re: his 1920 quote ...
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
Of course Bush would also resemble Mencken's remartk.
carry on
Stick to insults Montana Urban Schmendrik since you obviously don't know shit from shinola about reality.
I take it your boy Barry is a towering intellect, shilohistan?
"Sammy said...Obamacare is just the method the left using to force the middle class having the healthcare as the poor, an the left politicians ( ie) them wouldn't be effected."
Gov. Palin - give up that nom de plume "Sammy"!
We know it's you "takin' us ta skool" with that erudite, incisive analysis!
Powerline: Why Is This Election Close?
On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans. Why isn’t it? I am afraid the answer may be that the country is closer to the point of no return than most of us believed. With over 100 million Americans receiving federal welfare benefits, millions more going on Social Security disability, and many millions on top of that living on entitlement programs–not to mention enormous numbers of public employees–we may have gotten to the point where the government economy is more important, in the short term, than the real economy. My father, the least cynical of men, used to quote a political philosopher to the effect that democracy will work until people figure out they can vote themselves money. I fear that time may have come.
Republicans Accuse Democrats of Lying Unfairly.
shiloh said...
All the foolish/delusional con posts at this blog ...
As per usual.
I think we'll need one of the walls of the Grand Canyonfor that projection.
Mencken was talkin' about Harding re: his 1920 quote ...
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
Of course Bush would also resemble Mencken's remartk.
No, more like willie, then Choom.
carry on
He certainly is, isn't he?
PS Still waiting for an explanation of why Choomie is dropping out of NC.
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
Of course Bush would also resemble Mencken's remartk.
Of course, W's IQ is higher than shiloh's, ritmo's, and garage's added together.
The truth can hurt sometimes, eh?
O Ritmo Segundo said...
Roberto:
The Depression started in 1929. This was right after Coolidge left office. Hoover didn't "start" a depression, he presided over it as the end-result of policies that led to it, enacted under the "laissez faire" Coolidge, took effect.
Unless you hate history and disbelieve cause and effect and believe that economics is not contingent upon past economic activity, then you are free to believe that Hoover somehow singlehandedly "caused" the crash all by his own and without the benefit of the economic environment that was structured by the previous man who held the office (although Woodrow Wilson, two administrations removed, certainly doesn't escape blame somehow! That's quite an intellectual feat! Blame the guy two administrations ago but not the one who had spent the last eight years neglecting everything.)
9/8/12 6:21 PM
First you ignore that depression immediately after the first world war that was over in a couple of years by simply not meddling in the economy. Coolidge was bright enough to know that. He also said Hoover was his biggest mistake.
Second you fail to note the Great Depression started with a stock market crash in 29, resulting from a credit bubble created by the feds (sounds familiar ). What turned in to the Great Depression was Hoover's progressive policies (again sound familiar) coupled with the populist idiocy of the Smoot-Hawley Act (again sounds familiar). The laws of economics haven't been repealed. Booms are followed by busts. That isn't going to change. Bad government policies, the usual democrat bromides worsen things, like FDR did in the 30's by building on Hoover's progressive policies. It took the country 17 years to finally overcome the depression. If Obama had done nothing more than extend the Bush rate cuts for ten years when he first took office and allowed for drilling at home and just backed off on excessive regulation, the economy would be in full recovery now and he would be cruising to a 50 state landslide.
But you can't keep fools from folly and thanks to the democrats here we are stuck in this disaster which is worsening.
You must truly hate history and cause and effect they way you torture both of them.
C4 wants to levy a VAT on imports like the Europeans and the Chinese but overlooks one huge detail, they just don't levy a VAT on imports but instead levy a VAT on everything, foreign and domestic. Otherwise they would be doing a Smoot-Hawley of their own and would suffer the same disaster like the US did in the 30's when the rest of the world retaliated against US exports. Believe or not the US is still the third largest exporter in the world. A US VAT tax on imports without taxing domestic producers equally would result in the same disaster as in the 30's. Now if you want to make the case for abolishig the income tax on ordinary income and replace it it with a VAT tax and just revert the income tax to those whom the original income tax applied to, the very high ordinary income earners at a very low rate that might be a defensible and sensible idea.
As for paying down the debt, common sense tells you it can't be done unless the budget is actually balanced then the debt would liquidate itself. Going back to the tax rates of the 40' to 60's is insane unless by some magic trick the US manages to somehow regain the share of the world's GDP it had back then. Notice also that in that era while tax rates were high the federal share of the GDP was much lower than today along with the federal share of spending as a percent of GDP. Now if you want to argue for those levels of taxation then you are also going to have to accept a much lower share of the GDP going to the government if paying down the debt is the goal, which is what is was back then.
These must be examples of the "facts" that Nathan Alexander claims I am too scared to address.
Yep, still too scared to actually address.
A sarcastic response based on a distorted rewrite of an issue doesn't come close to "addressing."
What are you afraid of?
Do you think your actual views and advocated positions can't stand up to even casual scrutiny. huh?
You know, this is one of those cases where the question is the answer.
shiloh said...
Small correction:
Coolidge was president (5) years, (7) mos.
Can't really blame Harding for anything as he was totally out of the loop until his death.
Mencken was talkin' about Harding re: his 1920 quote ...
As democracy is perfected, the office of president represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.
Of course Bush would also resemble Mencken's remartk.
carry on
That's a pretty good description of the electorate that voter for and will yet again for Choom & Gang. Your like the dog that looks in the mirror, incapable of see itself and barking at what it thinks is another dog. Carry on.
"Bruce Hayden said...
Powerline: Why Is This Election Close?
On paper, given Obama’s record, this election should be a cakewalk for the Republicans....."
Exactly. Currently over 50% of the populace enjoys some form of gummit' cheese. We will need a percentage of them to put a heavier bias on there kids and grandkids future needs than there current ones in the decision making process this Nov...I wish I were optimistic about that .
I'd say Mencken was right about at least half of the people who've occupied the White House. Dem and Repub.
If the country were run by the Constitutional principles it was founded upon it wouldn't matter as much who the president is. But, the way things are now it matters a lot, just when we have very few people in either party who rise above downright moron to choose from.
The RNC at least showed the Repubs have a group of people coming up who can rise above basic moron.
First you ignore that depression immediately after the first world war that was over in a couple of years by simply not meddling in the economy.
Why shouldn't I "ignore" it? It was apparently so insignificant that no one even knows about it.
Coolidge was bright enough to know that. He also said Hoover was his biggest mistake.
Which is not some proof that Hoover actually did something wrong. It's just an opinion. By the guy who had a vested interest in curtailing any blame.
Second you fail to note the Great Depression started with a stock market crash in 29, resulting from a credit bubble created by the feds (sounds familiar ).
Booms are followed by busts. That isn't going to change.
Keynesianism understands that and accordingly, uses the surplus of booms to pay down the debt so that busts need not be depressions. But you guys love spending surpluses, which is dumb.
It took the country 17 years to finally overcome the depression.
Wrong.
If Obama had done nothing more than extend the Bush rate cuts for ten years when he first took office and allowed for drilling at home and just backed off on excessive regulation, the economy would be in full recovery now and he would be cruising to a 50 state landslide.
Assertion without evidence. Plus, you are wrong that those cuts have not been extended. They're still in place.
You must truly hate history and cause and effect they way you torture both of them.
Be more original and stop stealing my lines.
C4 wants to...
I couldn't give a shit what that psychotic anti-semite wants to do.
As for paying down the debt, common sense tells you it can't be done unless the budget is actually balanced then the debt would liquidate itself.
Good. Then grow the economy. Fix/relieve the consumer debt your friends grew rich off of and get the Soup Nazi capitalists to stop holding the government prey to their hoarding. That is the only way to stimulate demand.
Going back to the tax rates of the 40' to 60's is insane unless by some magic trick the US manages to somehow regain the share of the world's GDP it had back then.
And if your guys keep bashing manufacturing, that will never happen.
Notice also that in that era while tax rates were high the federal share of the GDP was much lower than today along with the federal share of spending as a percent of GDP. Now if you want to argue for those levels of taxation then you are also going to have to accept a much lower share of the GDP going to the government if paying down the debt is the goal, which is what is was back then.
While I am wary of too high a debt/spending to GDP ratio, I could care less about the details than I could about the fact that Republicans don't distinguish long-term policies from short-term policies, that they want to repeat what caused the crisis, and that they will hold the economy hostage to their political ambitions.
That last one in itself proves that they are not worth trusting.
Do you think your actual views and advocated positions can't stand up to even casual scrutiny. huh?
No. I just think that you're a big liar. It doesn't matter what the issue or the argument is, you will come to your own foregone conclusion.
You know, this is one of those cases where the question is the answer.
That's exactly what I mean.
Everything you say is for the purpose of rhetoric alone.
A large minority of "Americans" are prepared to exchange their liberty for submission with benefits. Their leaders will enthusiastically support this regression in order to advance their own political, economic, and social standing.
Unfortunately, they are more than happy to share their fate with all Americans. They dream of instant gratification and the dignity of other people is the least of their concerns. Their vision is myopic, but at least they will feel a short-term high before reality effects a self-correction.
So, history is recorded in repeating cycles.
I just think that you're a big liar.
Wow. I haven't heard comebacks at that level since, say, 2nd grade.
That's as good as admitting you are dead wrong.
Nathan Alexander, looks like Ritmo pegged you.
"It doesn't matter what the issue or the argument is, you will come to your own foregone conclusion.
Everything you say is for the purpose of rhetoric alone."
9/8/12 8:53 PM
Allieoop,
I evaluate everything you lefties say every time. .
It isn't my fault progressives are consistently wrong.
If i would really have to choose, then i would to favor the aspiring president who would really give effort in peoples lives, health should be prioritized one and for all, health insurance, cheaper medicine, they should fund alternative cancer treatment center and make this country and this world a better place to live in, before helping other poor countries, why not help our poor countrymen first.
Post a Comment