Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We're nearing the end of September and Romney is floundering badly. VERY badly. His message is weak and President Obama is GAINING support and INCREASING his lead. Romney just claimed that half of people in this country are seeking entitlements. What a collosal blunder of a statement by a man who represents a party that cares about the rich while everyone can go to hell. Romney is looking more and more like a LOSER not a potential president.
Ohio, MI, PA are supporting OBAMA. Game over.
"Don't double down of trickle down" - Bill Clinton decimating Pubs at the DNC
We're nearing the end of September and Romney is floundering badly. VERY badly. His message is weak and President Obama is GAINING support and INCREASING his lead. Romney just claimed that half of people in this country are seeking entitlements. What a collosal blunder of a statement by a man who represents a party that cares about the rich while everyone can go to hell. Romney is looking more and more like a LOSER not a potential president.
Ohio, MI, PA are supporting OBAMA. Game over.
"Don't double down of trickle down" - Bill Clinton decimating Pubs at the DNC
I'm pretty sure the American people realize that a "COLLOSAL [sic] BLUNDER" was committed by Obama in not providing our embassies and consulates in the mid-east with extra security, failing to attend more than half of his intelligence briefings and standing by the inane statement that all of the anti-American riots were "spontaneous" because of a stupid Internet video .... on 9/11. Yes, the true colossal blunder was by Obama/Biden spiking the Bin Laden football and ignoring the chants; Obama, Obama, we are ALL Osama!
But, you keep on believing that Romney's comments at a fundraiser that 47% of Americans don't pay income tax (fact) is a losing issue.
I'm pretty sure the American people realize that a "COLLOSAL [sic] BLUNDER" was committed by Obama in not providing our embassies and consulates in the mid-east with extra security, failing to attend more than half of his intelligence briefings and standing by the inane statement that all of the anti-American riots were "spontaneous" because of a stupid Internet video .... on 9/11. Yes, the true colossal blunder was by Obama/Biden spiking the Bin Laden football and ignoring the chants; Obama, Obama, we are ALL Osama!
But, you keep on believing that Romney's comments at a fundraiser that 47% of Americans don't pay income tax (fact) is a losing issue.
I can't rep you enough!!!!
The hypocrisy and deflection attempts from the left is beyond laughable.
He is no longer a factor in Ohio, PA, MI, WI. The entire Northeast is solid Obama. Out west, he's losing Colorado, and has no chance in New Mexico. CA, Oregon, Washington are solid Obama. He likely will lose VA, NC, and likely Florida in spite of their voter purge. He is an inferior debater with an empty, hollow, inferior GOP stance on all the issues. President Obama, an experienced President, a superior debater, a man of much more depth, character, class, and intelligence, a man whose ideology is far, far the superior, is going to wipe the floor with Romney at the debates.
The only way Romney can come out favorably in the debates, is if he saves Obama's life. He's looking more and more like a stumbling, bumbling, babbling, fast talking imbecile who has no business in this race. A rich loser.
So the question remains to you Pubs....are you getting the message yet?
Romney in a free fall; debates will make it worse for him
Romney has his back against the wall now, and his humiliation is almost complete. Three debates against an incredibly superior man and sitting President is going to be embarrassing for him. While President Obama will naturally present his superior message in a smooth, coherent, effective message, Romney will appear combative, contrived, manufactured, fake, wooden, insincere, hollow, uncomfortable, and out of his league. President Obama resuscitated this country from the Dubya Dark Ages, while being obstructed by Romney's tea-party downgraded GOP, and Romney can offer nothing more than hiding from his party's past record, hollow criticism of Obama as Romney hides his tax returns, runs from his Bain record, and has an utter disdain for half the people in this country.
First debate a mere formality as the President Obama solidifies his lead and sure road to victory.
Well said A_Lexus! Rawmoney will be exposed as an entitled brat, "borrow money from your parents to start a business" captures the essence of this guy. He has no idea of what the real world is.
Obama actually tells people to start businesses with they're unemployment checks.
...a man who represents a party that cares about the rich while everyone can go to hell
Written by a Liberal:
Liberal Tightwads
Nicholas D. Kristof
12/23/08
This holiday season is a time to examine who's been naughty and who's been nice, but I'm unhappy with my findings. The problem is this: We liberals are personally stingy.
Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.
Arthur Brooks, the author of a book on donors to charity, "Who Really Cares," cites data that households headed by conservatives give 30 percent more to charity than households headed by liberals. A study by Google found an even greater disproportion: average annual contributions reported by conservatives were almost double those of liberals.
Other research has reached similar conclusions. The "generosity index" from the Catalogue for Philanthropy typically finds that red states are the most likely to give to nonprofits, while Northeastern states are least likely to do so.
The upshot is that Democrats, who speak passionately about the hungry and homeless, personally fork over less money to charity than Republicans -- the ones who try to cut health insurance for children. (GftS edit - not true)
"When I started doing research on charity," Mr. Brooks wrote, "I expected to find that political liberals -- who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did -- would turn out to be the most privately charitable people. So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views."
Something similar is true internationally. European countries seem to show more compassion than the United States in providing safety nets for the poor, and they give far more humanitarian foreign aid per capita than the United States does. But as individuals, Europeans are far less charitable than Americans.
Americans give sums to charity equivalent to 1.67% of GNP, according to a terrific new book, "Philanthrocapitalism," by Matthew Bishop and Michael Green. The British are second, with 0.73%, while the stingiest people on the list are the French, at 0.14%.
(Looking away from politics, there's evidence that one of the most generous groups in the United States is gays. Researchers believe that is because they are less likely to have rapacious heirs pushing to keep wealth in the family.)
When liberals see the data on giving, they tend to protest that conservatives look good only because they shower dollars on churches -- that a fair amount of that money isn't helping the poor, but simply constructing lavish spires.
It's true that religion is the essential reason conservatives give more, and religious liberals are as generous as religious conservatives. Among the stingiest of the stingy are secular conservatives. According to Google's figures, if donations to all religious organizations are excluded, liberals give slightly more to charity than conservatives do. But Mr. Brooks says that if measuring by the percentage of income given, conservatives are more generous than liberals even to secular causes. In any case, if conservative donations often end up building extravagant churches, liberal donations frequently sustain art museums, symphonies, schools and universities that cater to the well-off. (It's great to support the arts and education, but they're not the same as charity for the needy. And some research suggests that donations to education actually increase inequality because they go mostly to elite institutions attended by the wealthy.)
Conservatives also appear to be more generous than liberals in nonfinancial ways. People in red states are considerably more likely to volunteer for good causes, and conservatives give blood more often. If liberals and moderates gave blood as often as conservatives, Mr. Brooks said, the U.S. blood supply would increase by 45%.
So, you've guessed it! This column is a transparent attempt this holiday season to shame liberals into being more charitable. Since I often scold Republicans for being callous in their policies toward the needy, it seems only fair to reproach Democrats for being cheap in their private donations. What I want for Christmas is a healthy competition between left and right to see who actually does more for the neediest.
Of course, given the economic pinch these days, charity isn't on the top of anyone's agenda. Yet the financial ability to contribute to charity, and the willingness to do so, are strikingly unrelated. Amazingly, the working poor, who have the least resources, somehow manage to be more generous as a percentage of income than the middle class
So, even in tough times, there are ways to help. Come on liberals, redeem yourselves. Put your wallets where your hearts are.
AS EXPECTED! You cannot win with an ideology to undo the 20th century
Mitt Romney never stood a chance against the superior President Obama. Face it, Pubs. Romney was a mistake. Ryan was a mistake. Shame that it took an election to prove that once again, Pubs are clueless in putting forth yet another shameful presidential candidate like Mitt Romney.
Perhaps you can now see the light.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Romney continues the free fall...as expected
He's looking more and more like a stumbling, bumbling, babbling, fast talking imbecile who has no business in this race. A rich loser.
