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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-24-2008, 11:13 AM
 
4,176 posts, read 5,474,176 times
Reputation: 1849

Advertisements

Keep in mind there are lots of us who are strongly opposed to Obama, but are not in the tank for McCain or the GOP. Some voted Libertarian (such as myself) and others reluctantly voted for McCain b/c they thought he was the lesser of the two evils. I'll agree that McCain was not a great candidate (so will many of those who voted for him); if he were, I would have supported him. That said, I think Obama is worse than McCain and Barr (Libertarian).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-24-2008, 11:16 AM
 
Location: The Planet Mars
2,150 posts, read 2,306,773 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIS123 View Post
Keep in mind there are lots of us who are strongly opposed to Obama, but are not in the tank for McCain or the GOP. Some voted Libertarian (such as myself) and others reluctantly voted for McCain b/c they thought he was the lesser of the two evils. I'll agree that McCain was not a great candidate (so will many of those who voted for him); if he were, I would have supported him. That said, I think Obama is worse than McCain and Barr (Libertarian).
Everyone is entitled to their opinion...

At least you are always civil about yours...

Merry Christmas!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
5,144 posts, read 7,211,134 times
Reputation: 3501
Bill Clinton created more jobs than either poppy or baby bush. One of the reasons I'm so pleased with most of Obama's appointments is that he's bringing back a lot of people that served under Bill Clinton.
Cliip:
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has been attacking Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) as a “tax-and-spend liberal” for his plan to roll back the Bush tax cuts. Under President Bush, however, whose tax plan McCain wants to make permanent, only 4.8 million jobs were created. President Clinton, however, created 23 million jobs after raising income taxes and investing at home, as the Wonk Room notes:

Think Progress » Bush created 4.8 million jobs while ‘tax and spend’ Clinton created 23 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:06 PM
 
4,176 posts, read 5,474,176 times
Reputation: 1849
Intelligent people should understand that, just b/c events A and B occur during the same time period, does not mean that they are in any way related to each other or that one caused the other. For example, just b/c the Clinton Presidency consisted of i. higher income, capital gains and dividends taxes and ii. more new jobs being created than the GW Bush Presidency, it does not mean that higher taxes result in more jobs being created or that lower taxes result in fewer jobs being created. Most people realize that Government does not create the majority of jobs to begin with.

One of the things I can't stand is when the Clintons, Lanny Davis, Barney Frank and others go on and rattle off the BS about how Clinton had higher taxes than W and created more jobs than W (along with a better economy); therefore we should raise taxes back to the Clinton years (and then the economy will improve and more jobs will be created). I know that none of these politicians spewing this nonsense is dumb enough to believe it or they would not be as successful as they are. It's WAY more complicated than that. Keep in mind that many of the jobs that Clinton 'created' were lost after the Tech boom and Telecom boom (which was bigger than the Tech boom) burst. Government does not create jobs.

Anyone who believes this argument (that, b/c taxes were higher with Clinton and the economy was better, we should raise taxes) is a moron. At the very least, they do not take all factors into consideration and are simplifying the issue way too much. Reagan lowered taxes dramatically and the economy took off. Look at the states with the highest taxes: NY, NJ, CA, IL, etc. They are in shambles financially.

The unfortunate thing is that this concept did resonate with a lot of voters. If higher taxes are so great, why not raise them even further so we can 'create' more jobs? If Government spending is the key, why should the stimulus stop at $1 Trillion? Let's borrow more than that and 'create' jobs for everyone. If W had been President from 1993-2000 and Clinton from 2001-2008, we'd look at them differently. I don't mean to detract from Clinton, but his timing certainly didn't hurt. W had the recession he walked into, 9/11, Katrina, the subprime and credit crises, war in Iraq (which he advocated for) and other issues that made things tough for him. People act like, had Gore or Kerry been in office, the last 8 years, would have been paradise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
19,501 posts, read 20,861,578 times
Reputation: 13804
Quote:
Originally Posted by tigerlily View Post
Bill Clinton created more jobs than either poppy or baby bush. ]
The only job that Bubba "created" was Monica Lewinsky's.

The dot-com startups contributed the rest....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:26 PM
 
6,013 posts, read 6,910,539 times
Reputation: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIS123 View Post
I see your point but, as Ron Paul and Peter Schiff say, continuing to borrow and spend will devalue the dollar perhaps to the point that we're all f*****.

The root cause of this weak economy is the crisis in the housing market. This has many causes including: i. low interest rates (governed by the FOMC), ii. Fannie and Freddie (which were not regulated properly and there is evidence that the GOP tried to reign them in while the Dems blocked it), iii. predatory lending practices, iv. securitization of these mortgages by the brokerage firms, v. people themselves buying homes they could not afford (amongst other causes).
i dont think you know what your talking about....stop being so partisan. buying homes you cannot afford and thats determined by who?

what are the reasons people lose their homes.
skyrocketing interest rates,
job loss.
the war in iraq, whos paying for all this!??!

the republicans could have fixed what they claim the democrats block the first 6 yrs of bush presidency were ran by a republican majoirty so why not fix it then.....

if the housing had not been in a slump we still be in a crisis because we have an auto crisis as well.

all you republicans do is blame blame blame and distort. this admin had out us in debt admit it, sheesh
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:31 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
5,144 posts, read 7,211,134 times
Reputation: 3501
Quote:
Originally Posted by LIS123 View Post
I don't mean to detract from Clinton, but his timing certainly didn't hurt. W had the recession he walked into, 9/11, Katrina, the subprime and credit crises, war in Iraq (which he advocated for) and other issues that made things tough for him. People act like, had Gore or Kerry been in office, the last 8 years, would have been paradise.
Except that Gore would have focused on Afghanistan, not invaded a country than had nothing to do with 9/11. Katrina would have been handled differently with James Lee Witt directing FEMA instead of Chertoff and Brownie. Clinton would have been on the ground in LA like he was during the hurricanes in Florida, not doing a "flyover". Bush made things tough on himself. If bush walked into a "recession" he's leaving with a near "depression".
I agree just because you have a degree from Harvard or Yale doesn't make you intelligent. After all, bush has a degree from Yale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:49 PM
 
4,176 posts, read 5,474,176 times
Reputation: 1849
Katrina and the Iraq war are not the main causes of this mortgage/credit crisis, which is the root cause of the weak economy. The economy would not be significantly better had W lost either election in 2000 or 2004, though the war may have been handled differently. The housing market and FOMC decisions (which kept interest rates low) are not likely to have changed much, if at all.

There are a lot of Democratic politicians with Ivy League degrees who have poor track records as well. It's not limited to W or GOPers. Eliot Spitzer had perfect SAT and LSAT and graduated from Princeton and Harvard Law.

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- The Real Culprits In This Meltdown

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- Barney Frank's Bankrupt Ideas (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=308185654524278 - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 12:57 PM
 
Location: The Planet Mars
2,150 posts, read 2,306,773 times
Reputation: 523
Quote:
Originally Posted by TuborgP View Post
Obama frustrates Republicans' desire to criticize - International Herald Tribune

"The president-elect is proving to be an elusive and frustrating target. He has defied attempts to be framed ideologically. His cabinet picks have won wide praise. An effort by the Republican National Committee to link Obama to the unfolding scandal involving Governor Rod Blagojevich of Illinois and the accusations that he tried to sell Obama's Senate seat was dismissed by no less a figure than John McCain, the Republican whom Obama beat for the presidency".

I am sure they must have someone who can keep up with POTUS Elect Obama.

"The Republican National Committee, which is in the midst of a battle over who will be its next chairman, appears to be having particular trouble in finding the right tone. It has continued a daily patter of attacks on Obama that it offered throughout the campaign, a strategy pushed by the chairman, Mike Duncan, but one that clearly does not have universal support".

I am sure they must have someone who can keep up with POTUS Elect Obama.


Maybe if they tried to just be decent American's they might be able to get some sort of legs under them. Ya think?
Tuborgp,

I think you are a bit optimistic to infer that someone from the Neocon Far Right can rise to the occassion of intellectually challenging Obama anytime soon ...

In reality, the extreme right needs to go through at least another million years of evolution before they will be up to the task.... I mean face it, some of them are only the 2nd generation standing up straight in their famiies.. And by then, Bush and his ilk will be nothing more than a dried out turd in the garbage-heap of history... and this will all be moot anyhow...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-24-2008, 01:21 PM
 
20,857 posts, read 39,095,620 times
Reputation: 19115
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbob View Post
Tuborgp,

I think you are a bit optimistic to infer that someone from the Neocon Far Right can rise to the occassion of intellectually challenging Obama anytime soon ...

In reality, the extreme right needs to go through at least another million years of evolution before they will be up to the task.... I mean face it, some of them are only the 2nd generation standing up straight in their famiies.. And by then, Bush and his ilk will be nothing more than a dried out turd in the garbage-heap of history... and this will all be moot anyhow...
That nicely sums up this thread. Well done.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:22 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