2012: Obama Wins. Now what?

[Greenbeard]

Except that I don't recall anyone suggesting we scrap either Social Security or Medicare. Fixing does not coincide with "scrapping".

Immie

Privatization would equate to scrapping social security

Republicans advocated scrapping Medicare and replacing it with a voucher system

The repeal-and-replace of Medicare.

 

[francoHFW]

golden age- Dem landslide.

 

[Ropey]

 

[JoeB131]

Why in the HELL should his religion have anything to do with it? And why in the Hell should anyone be "scared" over someone else's religion? That's absolute stupidity.

Right. So if he belonged to a religion that called for vengence on the murderers of the Prophet (which Mormon Temple Oaths called for up until the 1930's), insisted that their goal was to create God's Kingdom on Earth, and called all other creeds an "abomination onto the Lord", that shouldn't concern me at all.

Sorry, for me, that was first and foremost the deal killer.

That sounds like pretty much every flavor of Abrahamic religion, when sufficiently twisted for one's own predetermined prejudices and agendas. Stop sounding like Osama bin Laden.

Yes, hundreds of years ago, that was the case for other religions.. It is still the case for Islam today.

The Mormon Scam is only about 150 years old. It still believes this kind of shit.

 

[JoeB131]

Future Headlines:
November 2011- Obama leads all polls by 5%.
December 2011- Obama leads all polls by 5%.
January 2012- Obama leads all polls by 6%.
March 2012- Obama leads all polls by 7%.
May 2012- Obama leads all polls by 8%.
July 2012 - Obama leads all polls by 9%
Sept 2012 - Obama leads all polls by 10%
November 5th 2012- Obama with commanding lead over Romney.

November 7th, 2012- Mitt Romney defeats Barack Obama by largest margin in history.

November 8th, 2012 - Obama celebrates. Relief that he finally can golf during the week, and smoke in public.

If the republicans are sufficently retarded to nominate Romney, they will lose and deservedly so.

It will be the first time in 32 years I haven't voted for the Republican.

Not a big fan of Romney either. I cannot however, sit out. Another 4 years of Obama is too much to bear.
I urge you to please reconsider. Is another Obama admin really what you want?

My own opinion is that Romney would be worse. He believes in the same kind of liberal shit. Electing him would be conceding the fundemental argument AND giving legitimacy to the LDS Cult. It's a twofer of bad ideas.

At least with Obama, the GOP will feel some obligation to oppose more and bigger government and more giveaways to Wall Street. Romney will grease the skids for that kind of stuff.

 

[EriktheRed]

2012: Obama Wins. Now what?

Your wingnut head explodes and we laugh.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Future Headlines:
November 2011- Obama leads all polls by 5%.
December 2011- Obama leads all polls by 5%.
January 2012- Obama leads all polls by 6%.
March 2012- Obama leads all polls by 7%.
May 2012- Obama leads all polls by 8%.
July 2012 - Obama leads all polls by 9%
Sept 2012 - Obama leads all polls by 10%
November 5th 2012- Obama with commanding lead over Romney.

November 7th, 2012- Mitt Romney defeats Barack Obama by largest margin in history.

November 8th, 2012 - Obama celebrates. Relief that he finally can golf during the week, and smoke in public.

If the republicans are sufficently retarded to nominate Romney, they will lose and deservedly so.

It will be the first time in 32 years I haven't voted for the Republican.

Not a big fan of Romney either. I cannot however, sit out. Another 4 years of Obama is too much to bear.
I urge you to please reconsider. Is another Obama admin really what you want?

I to cannot bear to see another four years of bush-obama policy that's why I will never vote for Romney.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If the republicans are sufficently retarded to nominate Romney, they will lose and deservedly so.

It will be the first time in 32 years I haven't voted for the Republican.

Not a big fan of Romney either. I cannot however, sit out. Another 4 years of Obama is too much to bear.
I urge you to please reconsider. Is another Obama admin really what you want?

My own opinion is that Romney would be worse. He believes in the same kind of liberal shit. Electing him would be conceding the fundemental argument AND giving legitimacy to the LDS Cult. It's a twofer of bad ideas.

At least with Obama, the GOP will feel some obligation to oppose more and bigger government and more giveaways to Wall Street. Romney will grease the skids for that kind of stuff.

If you can't get rid of the bush obama type work on Congress and elect Constitutional minded people.

 

[rightwinger]

Not a big fan of Romney either. I cannot however, sit out. Another 4 years of Obama is too much to bear.
I urge you to please reconsider. Is another Obama admin really what you want?

My own opinion is that Romney would be worse. He believes in the same kind of liberal shit. Electing him would be conceding the fundemental argument AND giving legitimacy to the LDS Cult. It's a twofer of bad ideas.

At least with Obama, the GOP will feel some obligation to oppose more and bigger government and more giveaways to Wall Street. Romney will grease the skids for that kind of stuff.

If you can't get rid of the bush obama type work on Congress and elect Constitutional minded people.

As bad as Congress is, they have done nothing unconstitutional

 

[bigrebnc1775]

My own opinion is that Romney would be worse. He believes in the same kind of liberal shit. Electing him would be conceding the fundemental argument AND giving legitimacy to the LDS Cult. It's a twofer of bad ideas.

At least with Obama, the GOP will feel some obligation to oppose more and bigger government and more giveaways to Wall Street. Romney will grease the skids for that kind of stuff.

If you can't get rid of the bush obama type work on Congress and elect Constitutional minded people.

As bad as Congress is, they have done nothing unconstitutional

oh wow a mindless obamush type. Where did I say they did anything unconstitutional? To keep a Constitutional controlled and restraint government it looks like we must work on Congress, not the President because that hasn't worked in years. Your congressional elected rep is more controllable than the Presidential election.

 

[rightwinger]

If you can't get rid of the bush obama type work on Congress and elect Constitutional minded people.

As bad as Congress is, they have done nothing unconstitutional

oh wow a mindless obamush type. Where did I say they did anything unconstitutional? To keep a Constitutional controlled and restraint government it looks like we must work on Congress, not the President because that hasn't worked in years. Your congressional elected rep is more controllable than the Presidential election.

If you have read the Constitution, it provides a broad framework of how Congress shall operate. It is not a users guide telling them what they can and cannot do.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

As bad as Congress is, they have done nothing unconstitutional

oh wow a mindless obamush type. Where did I say they did anything unconstitutional? To keep a Constitutional controlled and restraint government it looks like we must work on Congress, not the President because that hasn't worked in years. Your congressional elected rep is more controllable than the Presidential election.

If you have read the Constitution, it provides a broad framework of how Congress shall operate. It is not a users guide telling them what they can and cannot do.

Deflection, where did I say Congress hasn't acted Constitutional? Congress has in recent years been in gray areas when it comes to the constitutional restraint's of certain bills and congressional actions. They can create laws at first to be unconstitutional but after the elected officials vote on it would make it constitutional. At least some constitutional scholars would agree because they used the constitutional process to in act a legislation.

 

[dblack]

If you have read the Constitution, it provides a broad framework of how Congress shall operate. It is not a users guide telling them what they can and cannot do.

I read it. "A user's guide telling them what they can and cannot do" is pretty much exactly what it is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Only a fool or someone who knows nothing at all about investing would say something as foolish as that and mean it. So, I must assume you either know nothing of investing or you say that tongue in cheek because I am certain you are not a fool.

Immie

I know enough about investing to know that it is unpredictable and you need to be divested

Right now, most retirees rely on a three legged stool with their money spread between a Social Security annuity, a paid off home and cash savings.

Removing that dependable annuity is highly risky. Also most retirees would choose to keep their Social Security

And given the choice if they are confronted with death before a long retirement, most people would choose to have the right to pass on their retirement accounts to their loved ones rather than giving it away to Congress.

I, for one, do not believe that SS should be eliminated. However it should be privatized and those tax dollars should be placed into an account in the name of the taxpayer with options similar to a mutual fund rather than stolen by Congress for a promise to pay later.

Immie

So the the fascistic club of government corporatism can have the opportunity to get even moe obscenely wealthy at the real risk of SS recipients getting nothing in return?

You have no stats whatsoever to even begin to chatter that "most people would choose . . ." nonsense. Nothing at all. It's your opinion, but you cannot support it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Whoever the republican nominee is, the election will not be about how acceptable that nominee is, but how much obama is despised.

How do you think Arnold Schwarzeneggar got to be governor of California? A less than ideal candidate took the office not because he was liked or qualified but because Gray Davis was the subject of universal revulsion.

 

[rightwinger]

Whoever the republican nominee is, the election will not be about how acceptable that nominee is, but how much obama is despised.

How do you think Arnold Schwarzeneggar got to be governor of California? A less than ideal candidate took the office not because he was liked or qualified but because Gray Davis was the subject of universal revulsion.

Glad you think that..

The Republican candidate will have to meet the broad standard of being presidential. It means, I can be trusted to run this country. Only two of the candidates can meet that standard.....Romney and Gingrich

Republicans will have to run on something........Running on the assumption that America hates Obama is a losing proposition

 

[rightwinger]

If you have read the Constitution, it provides a broad framework of how Congress shall operate. It is not a users guide telling them what they can and cannot do.

I read it. "A user's guide telling them what they can and cannot do" is pretty much exactly what it is.

I knew you didn't read it

 

[Full-Auto]

Whoever the republican nominee is, the election will not be about how acceptable that nominee is, but how much obama is despised.

How do you think Arnold Schwarzeneggar got to be governor of California? A less than ideal candidate took the office not because he was liked or qualified but because Gray Davis was the subject of universal revulsion.

Glad you think that..

The Republican candidate will have to meet the broad standard of being presidential. It means, I can be trusted to run this country. Only two of the candidates can meet that standard.....Romney and Gingrich

Republicans will have to run on something........Running on the assumption that America hates Obama is a losing proposition

All they need to do is talk jobs and democrats are left out of the discussion. After 3 years we know only government jobs are important to democrats.

 

[Salt Jones]

Whoever the republican nominee is, the election will not be about how acceptable that nominee is, but how much obama is despised.

How do you think Arnold Schwarzeneggar got to be governor of California? A less than ideal candidate took the office not because he was liked or qualified but because Gray Davis was the subject of universal revulsion.

Which turned out to manufactured by Jon and Ken and other right-wing activists. Remember when they accused Gray Davis and his administration of lying about power companies manipulating power outages and Davis bought all that power at those super high prices, locking in overpriced rates for years? He did that to combat the "outrage" over his "lying" about power outage manipulating. He wasn't great, but Davis turned out better then Arnold and how'd that "lie" about power manipulation turn out?

 

[dblack]

If you have read the Constitution, it provides a broad framework of how Congress shall operate. It is not a users guide telling them what they can and cannot do.

I read it. "A user's guide telling them what they can and cannot do" is pretty much exactly what it is.

I knew you didn't read it

I knew you knew I knew you didn't know whether I read it or not.