U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Who won the 1st Presidential Debate
McCain 124 32.04%
Obama 194 50.13%
It was a tie 69 17.83%
Voters: 387. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-27-2008, 12:19 PM
 
11,127 posts, read 12,664,711 times
Reputation: 3676

Advertisements

Has anyone else noticed the "polling effect"? The first two hours after the debate, it was fairly close with a large number of people, including myself, seeing this debate as a tie. The day after, when folks have seen polling results and ended up in here, the Obama slight lead went off the charts.

Who says the media can't guide public opinion with little more than a few digits.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2008, 12:21 PM
 
Location: Yes
2,660 posts, read 6,021,778 times
Reputation: 884
Whoops. I obviously missed this one when I created my poll. Sorry

It must have been buried deep down by the time I woke up this morning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 12:26 PM
Status: "13 years on C-D" (set 5 days ago)
 
Location: Shallow alcove hidden from the telescreen
2,831 posts, read 9,915,082 times
Reputation: 1492
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Who says the media can't guide public opinion with little more than a few digits.
It's a charade, of course! Now vote third party already! Break the corporate choke-hold on democracy!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 12:31 PM
 
125 posts, read 166,285 times
Reputation: 58
Actually, there are many flaws in many of the plans both have expressed.

Now why won't either one address the issues of more welfare reform and illegal aliens? Just two issues I feel should be addressed ... and aggressively acted upon once in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Texas
835 posts, read 1,195,184 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by geeoro View Post
Where do you get the impression that McCain will be good for Jobs? He is Part of the reason why your hard eraned money is now being given to Bail out Wall Street. He wants to give across the board tax cuts, which again will benefit the rich. He wants to find money by freezing payments that will only hurt middle America. He is going to carry on with a hugely expensive war that cannot be won because as soon as troop levels go down, the terrorists will return, then McCain will use a surge again. Remember he said we will be in Iraq for 100 years. So tell me how McCain is going to help America? He will HAVE TO increase taxes to pay for his schemes.
The US has the 2nd highest corp. tax of the OCED..second only to Japan who will lower theirs this year. Business has one goal---to make a profit...if you are going to open a business are you going to do it where you will pay 35% in taxes or where you will pay 25% in taxes or even less? McCain will lower the corp. tax rate to 25-28% while Obama will raise the current level of 35% to 38-40% and then you have to tack on the increase in SS and Medicare/caid increase as well so that LLC's are paying 55-58% in taxes from the current 38% and Scorp. are paying 58-60% (most Scorps are over 250k as the profits/assets are run thru the owner not the business their taxes are higher for various reasons look them up). Now there are 27million SBO's in this country that account for 75% of the job growth and Obama wants to raise taxes on them....there are three options for them and none of them will grow jobs or the economy. He talks about closing loop holes...he can't as we are a global economy and to close the loopholes that allow Dell, Banks, The Auto industry to operate in the states and abroad will send those companies aboard where the taxes are 10-20% cheaper. He will create a mass exodus so the loophole speech is pure BS. Lowering taxes for 95% of Americans is BS as well because he will increase the Capital gains and SS and Medicare/caid so 100% of Americans will have a tax increase under Obama. Do you have a 401k, a Roth IRA, a pension, own stock, a college plan 529 or education IRA? All of these are currently taxed at a 15% tax rate except the college plans that are slightly lower, and Obama will raise these to 28%. One of the above posts spoke of people selling off everything...that won't happen as the penalties will break people and my Roth IRA has lost 20% in the last quarter alone and my kids college funds are down 10-15%. The democrates are the reason we are bailing out wall street. Here are some articles and a video from the 90's and early 2000-2005 that tell the truth in the history of this scandal. Did I answer your question or do you need more?
Quote:
New York Times story from September 2003, clearly showing that the first substantive Fannie and Freddie reform from inside government came from the Bush administration. Spurred by worries that Fannie and Freddie were cooking their books and taking too many risks, Treasury Secretary John Snow proposed placing the companies under Treasury oversight with strict controls over risk and capital reserves. The NYT labeled the proposal "the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago" and noted:

Quote:
But liberals like Barney Frank wanted more. They wanted the low cost of low-risk loans to be extended to higher-risk borrowers with lower incomes, fewer assets or less-solid credit. Barney and friends used the regulations of the Community Reinvestment Act to threaten lenders into making these loans. And banks, trying to meet Frank’s demands, expanded riskier lending schemes like subprime mortgages. Lenders asked themselves, why should I care how shaky these borrowers are or risky the loans if a government-backed body is going to buy them up anyway?

Quote:
John McCain and Barack Obama now criticize the risk-tolerant regulatory regime that produced the current crisis. But Sen. McCain's criticisms are at least credible, since he has been pointing to systemic risks in the mortgage market and trying to do something about them for years. Sen. Obama's conversion as a financial reformer marks a reversal from his actions in previous years, when he did nothing to disturb the status quo. Mr. Obama's vice-presidential search committee, Jim Johnson, a former chairman of Fannie Mae, was the one who announced Fannie's original affordable-housing program in 1991 -- just as Congress was taking up the first GSE regulatory legislation. In 2005, the Senate Banking Committee adopted a strong reform bill. The bill prohibited the GSEs from holding portfolios. All the Republicans on the Committee supported the bill, and all the Democrats voted against it. Mr. McCain endorsed the legislation in a speech on the Senate floor. Mr. Obama, like all other Democrats, remained silent.
Quote:
Now the Democrats are blaming the financial crisis on "deregulation." This is a canard. There has indeed been deregulation in our economy -- in long-distance telephone rates, airline fares, securities brokerage and trucking, to name just a few -- and this has produced much innovation and lower consumer prices. But the primary "deregulation" in the financial world in the last 30 years permitted banks to diversify their risks geographically and attract more than $100 billion of new capital in the past year to replace most of their subprime-related write-downs.
FYI-Wells fargo is one of the few banks that stayed away from sub-primes and has grown their revenue by 5-9% do to this deregulation and they are throwing money into the economy so that there is cash flow.
Quote:
Published: September 30, 1999
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring. Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. ''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''
Quote:
"The mortgage industry intends to pursue minorities with greater intensity as federal regulators turn up the heat to increase home ownership," Glenn said in his remarks at the annual convention of the Mortgage Banker Association of America."The federal government in the meantime has increased pressure on lenders to seek out minorities, as well as low-income groups and borrowers with poor credit histories," Glenn said. "Fannie Mae recently reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to commit half its business to low- and moderate-income borrowers. That means half the mortgages bought by Fannie Mae would be from those income brackets."In that same year, Freddie Mac warned of the logical pitfalls of pursuing loans on the basis of skin color and not credit history. The Washington Post reported that the company conducted a study in which it was found that far more black people have bad credit than white people, even when both have the same incomes. In fact, the study showed a higher percentage of African Americans with incomes of $65,000 to $75,000 had bad credit than white Americans with incomes of below $25,000. The study, however, came under brutal attack in the U.S. Congress and was ridiculed with charges of racism. A few years later, when Greg Mankiw, chairman of President Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, voiced a warning about weakened underwriting standards, Congress rebuffed him as well. The Wall Street Journal quoted Congressman Barney Frank, D-Mass., in 2003 as criticizing Greg Mankiw "because he is worried about the tiny little matter of safety and soundness rather than 'concern about housing.'"

Perhaps the polls wouldn't reflect so negatively for Senator John McCain if the public were informed that during the same timeframe Obama was pocketing money from these corrupted institutions, John McCain was fighting to reform them
Quote:
For years I have been concerned about the regulatory structure that governs Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac-known as Government-sponsored entities or GSEs-and the sheer magnitude of these companies and the role they play in the housing market. OFHEO's report this week does nothing to ease these concerns. In fact, the report does quite the contrary. OFHEO's report solidifies my view that the GSEs need to be reformed without delay. I join as a cosponsor of the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, S. 190, to underscore my support for quick passage of GSE regulatory reform legislation. If Congress does not act, American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system, and the economy as a whole.
John S. McCain on the senate floor 2005

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o
Better not bank on Barney Frank - BostonHerald.com
Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF933A0575AC0A96F9582 60&scp=1&sq=&st=nyt - broken link)
Guess again who's to blame for U.S. mortgage meltdown
Blame Fannie Mae and Congress For the Credit Mess - WSJ.com
Bloomberg.com: News
Barney Frank's Fannie and Freddie Muddle - Sam Dealey (usnews.com)

Last edited by artifice; 09-27-2008 at 01:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:25 PM
 
1,906 posts, read 2,951,699 times
Reputation: 2445
Default You are correct sir

Quote:
Originally Posted by big mean bear View Post
Internet blogging malcontent websites such as this are notoriously liberal. That speaks for the liberal 'skew' in this poll....
Big Mean Bear...yes, you are correct. In a USA Today Poll, Obama was ahead by 9 points. The funny thing was, the poll was, according to their own polling methods, "weighted heavily in favor of African American households." In addtion to that skewed methodology, they also stated that they polled 10% more Democrat households than Republican. So if he's up by 9%, but the polled 10% more Democrats, I'd take that to mean Obama is down by 1%?

But hey, you can skew a poll to make it look anyway you want, and the poll on this forum is no exception.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:29 PM
 
Location: Charlotte
12,646 posts, read 13,903,336 times
Reputation: 1679
Quote:
Originally Posted by walksalone View Post
Actually, there are many flaws in many of the plans both have expressed.

Now why won't either one address the issues of more welfare reform and illegal aliens? Just two issues I feel should be addressed ... and aggressively acted upon once in office.
Welfare is an individual State issue. The Fannie/Freddie blame game is fairly weak considering the majority of toxic loans involved in the current mess were not FHA mortgage products, the subprime loan exposure for Fannie & Freddie was minimal. As late as 2006 the GSE's overall mortgage's was only 42% vs. a rapid climb to over 70% as Wall Street began to fail and the conventional banks began to encounter problems. An objective view shows Fannie and Freddie had to be saved in order to save Wall Street and the rest of us. "As Paul Krugman points out, a “subprime borrower is basically someone whose credit wasn’t good enough to qualify for a Fannie- or Freddie-backed mortgage”. The subprime market & the really toxic stuff—was always dominated by Wall Street and Wall Street-backed lenders."[1]

Senator McCain wasn't fighting to reform the GSE's and his statements have been broadly taken out of context for political reason's. He was responding to accounting oversight and issues within the GSE's at the time. He always been a deregulator and his consistent support of deregulation leaves him in the unenviable postition of one who has to fight his record in order to promote himself for political expediency.


Ringing an alarm, not averting a crisis

http://www.politifact.com/media/img/tom-barelytrue.gif (broken link) The turmoil on Wall Street is prompting the presidential candidates to offer prescriptions for restoring order to U.S. financial markets. John McCain is using the opportunity to remind voters that he called on Congress to crack down on government-chartered mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Appearing on CNN’s American Morning on Sept. 16, 2008, McCain sought to blame much of the crisis on Wall Street greed and inept or corrupt government regulators. “Ask any American citizen who has been the victim of a bureaucrat or a bureaucracy,” McCain said. “I said two years ago that the Fannie and Freddie thing was a very serious problem and we had to work on it. And I have always opposed greed of Wall Street and I know how we can fix this.”
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:36 PM
 
Location: Charlotte
12,646 posts, read 13,903,336 times
Reputation: 1679
Quote:
Originally Posted by TnHilltopper View Post
Has anyone else noticed the "polling effect"? The first two hours after the debate, it was fairly close with a large number of people, including myself, seeing this debate as a tie. The day after, when folks have seen polling results and ended up in here, the Obama slight lead went off the charts.

Who says the media can't guide public opinion with little more than a few digits.
That is interesting, I noticed this was much closer last night with a slight edge to Senator Obama. Whether folks slept on it or went with the pundits, is anyone's guess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 01:38 PM
 
Location: Texas
835 posts, read 1,195,184 times
Reputation: 173
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Welfare is an individual State issue. The Fannie/Freddie blame game is fairly weak considering the majority of toxic loans involved in the current mess were not FHA mortgage products, the subprime loan exposure for Fannie & Freddie was minimal. As late as 2006 the GSE's overall mortgage's was only 42% vs. a rapid climb to over 70% as Wall Street began to fail and the conventional banks began to encounter problems. An objective view shows Fannie and Freddie had to be saved in order to save Wall Street and the rest of us. "As Paul Krugman points out, a “subprime borrower is basically someone whose credit wasn’t good enough to qualify for a Fannie- or Freddie-backed mortgage”. The subprime market & the really toxic stuff—was always dominated by Wall Street and Wall Street-backed lenders."[1]

Senator McCain wasn't fighting to reform the GSE's and his statements have been broadly taken out of context for political reason's. He was responding to accounting oversight and issues within the GSE's at the time. He always been a deregulator and his consistent support of deregulation leaves him in the unenviable postition of one who has to fight his record in order to promote himself for political expediency.


Ringing an alarm, not averting a crisis

The turmoil on Wall Street is prompting the presidential candidates to offer prescriptions for restoring order to U.S. financial markets. John McCain is using the opportunity to remind voters that he called on Congress to crack down on government-chartered mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
Appearing on CNN’s American Morning on Sept. 16, 2008, McCain sought to blame much of the crisis on Wall Street greed and inept or corrupt government regulators. “Ask any American citizen who has been the victim of a bureaucrat or a bureaucracy,” McCain said. “I said two years ago that the Fannie and Freddie thing was a very serious problem and we had to work on it. And I have always opposed greed of Wall Street and I know how we can fix this.”
Read post 185....you are a bit off on your analysis
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2008, 03:05 PM
 
125 posts, read 166,285 times
Reputation: 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by walidm View Post
Welfare is an individual State issue.
I beg to differ. Welfare programs are a combined effort between federal and state government. link


The Federal Government needs to really tighten the belt or get out of it altogether.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:25 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top