Project 1999 - Sorry Conservatives, but Obama looks like he has this one in the bag

Project 1999 (/forums/index.php)

- Off Topic (/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=19)

Quote:

Originally Posted by purist 4.0 (Post 760338)

i assure you nobody gives the slightest shit about your respect

That cuts deep, coming from a guy on his 4th troll account on everquest forums.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daldolma (Post 760337)

Lol. There aren't two sides to facts, there's just context that makes the facts meaningful -- context you're either intentionally excluding or blissfully ignorant of. Obama created jobs in 2010 that he lost in 2009. For Obama's presidency as a whole, there has been a net gain of 562,000 jobs. As a point of reference, Bush gained 1.1 million jobs in his second term -- and Clinton gained 20+ million in his presidency.

If you want to talk just private sector, Obama lost almost 4.7 million private sector jobs in his first year -- more than any year in two-plus decades. In 2010, he regained 1.2 million of those. You have to be insane to act like that's some sort of accomplishment. We lost nearly 9 million private sector jobs between 2008 and 2009, and you want to act like regaining 1.2 million in 2010 is a bullet point on a list of achievements? It's also totally disingenuous to say that 1.2 million represents more than Bush created in his entire presidency. By that reasoning, you could likewise say that Bush created more private sector jobs in 2006 (and 2005, and 2004) than Obama did in his entire presidency. The problem is that you're isolating an up year for one president and comparing it to a net total for the other.

Your next point will almost certainly be that it's Bush's fault that Obama lost jobs in 2009. Bush lost over 2 million private sector jobs in 2001, but I doubt you'd be interested in attributing that to Clinton.

Anyway, there aren't two sides to facts, but some of those facts re: Obama are cherry picked, phrased, and intentionally misrepresented to make Obama look as good as possible despite the actual context of the situation. This was just one example.

because yes, 2009 was clearly Obama's fault. im sure 8 years of crazy had nothing to do with that.

under bush we were hemorrhaging 750,000 jobs per month.

and we've had what now, just about 3 years worth of consecutive job growth minus a month here or there ?

any way you slice it, gaining jobs slowly is better than losing 750,000 per month.

<3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirken (Post 760336)

however with Romney, it doesn't take rocket science to see the guy for the lying piece of shit that he is. go watch the republican primaries, re watch the debates, and then watch the videos on Romneys website. they all contradict each other. if he's not just blatantly lying and making shit up based on whoever he happens to be talking to on that day, then he has the single worst case of multiple personality disorder that i have ever seen in my life.

Damn. I was getting used to all the honest politicians.

They all lie. They all say what they need to say to get elected. Picking your president on the basis of who seems more honest is ridiculous.

back to rnf in 5....4.....3....

National deficit is completely unimportant, as long as we get those 750k jobs per month, run it up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daldolma (Post 760347)

Damn. I was getting used to all the honest politicians.

They all lie. They all say what they need to say to get elected. Picking your president on the basis of who seems more honest is ridiculous.

if you think all politicians are as bad as Romney i urge you to spend more time following politics. every speaker (political or other) makes slight changes based on the audience.

they do not do complete 180s on the polices that they are running on.

i sometimes wonder if Romney even is aware of the fact that all his shit hes said is on tape and can be view by any asshole with a library card.

all this, and i havent even mentioned the tape where Romney did not know he was being recorded, and decided to put 47% of America on blast.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hailto (Post 760349)

National deficit is completely unimportant, as long as we get those 750k jobs per month, run it up.

read better. we were LOSING 750k per month

we arent gaining anywhere close to 750k per month.

as i said, its way to slow.

but its better than still losing jobs.

(i choose to ignore your sarcasm, because u resorting to it is a sign of defeat on your part, and im enjoying our discussion).

Sirken, let me see if I understand your points here:

1. You like Obama because he spends money on things you like, like americans with disabilities or or military families to go visit their loved ones. Well, those are called special interest groups. We have another, more obnoxious special interest group: its called the bankers. And Obama/Bernanke together gave them 14 trillion dollars which went directly to bank bonuses for the 0.1%. Gee that seems like about 1000 times more than he gave your guys. I thought Obama was for the little guy . . .

2. You like Obama because he looks out for women and minorities. Guess what: women and minorities are doing fine on their own. Hanna Rosin had an article a full two years ago about how women get 60% of college degrees and are going to be a majority in the workforce soon - she called it the End of Men. The old canard about women making 70 cents for every dollar a man makes has been debunked numerous times: women work fewer hours, take more vacation, dont go into STEM fields as much. I should also mention that Sotomayor is a huge racist: "I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life" If a white male had said that about her, he would have been crucified by CNN.

3. You like Obama because he put legislation in place to control the banks. Aside from the facts that he gave them 14 trillion and that Clinton, a Democrat, was the one who repealed Glass-Steagall, what do you think about the robosigning scandal, where Obama's DOJ let the banks off with a slap on the wrist after they fraudulently foreclosed on millions of Americans with fake documents?

4. You like Obama because he 'promotes social responsibility', but how about civil rights. Do you have any comments on Obama and the NDAA?

I think I'm going to leave the final comment to Alexander Fraser Tytler: "A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy..."

and now after reading my responses im seeing that you have backed me into a "pro-Obama" person, and that's also not the case. as i said earlier in this thread,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sirken (Post 760269)

Obama is very far from the "perfect" president, dont get me wrong. but the republicans nominated the absolute worst person they could have possibly ran.

How can you have a serious discussion about Obama's policies and what he has accomplished without at least addressing the fact that he has increased our national debt by $6 trillion? The fact that we have spent such a stupid amount of money (i realize Bush started the stimulus, i don't vouch for him either) and we still aren't seeing any sort of significant growth should be able to tell you that what we are doing simply doesn't work. Given that fact, how can you vote for the incumbent?