Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
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)
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:34 PM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,590 posts, read 45,236,649 times
Reputation: 13870

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayiask View Post
A great many people in So. Dak make under $75,000 a year...
That's not low-income. Obama's predominant voters in 2008 made under $30,000 a year and under, mostly skewed to $15,000 and under.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:35 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,368,753 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Because those that do not understand his political "gaffe" are either:

1. So totally unobjective because of their hatred for the current president that they cannot see straight;
2. Have not concept of who pays taxes and who does not and why they don't pay taxes;
3. Are totally ignorant of the voting motivations of people.

There's plenty of "losers" in that 47% who will be voting for Romney. Again, all one has to do is view Alexandra Pelosi's clips on voters. Mitt insulted them but they are probably too dumb to know it.
I am both pretty old (80) and a vet and I failed to take umbrage at what he said. However, my wife and I take in enough from pensions to keep us above the poverty level, quite a bit. I might add that I am not totally ignorant about the voting motivations of people in that many have seen through the Obama campaign and media noise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:39 PM
 
48,493 posts, read 97,115,078 times
Reputation: 18310
No.because those figures come from government stats which alos show that above 60% get more services than they pay for i taxes. Nothing new really.Its beeen pointed out by those who want to elimiante thpose special deductions and simplify income tax code to be based on all compensation to level the field.The tax code by lawmakers than rerward politcal special interest has made the code so comp-licated that even CPAs do not alwqays understand it and IRS has to have a manual to audit a pertson.That is politics at work with its special interest from main street to wall street.Just the unreported income is estmated at 300 billion by governamnt which is hard to catch under existing code and would be much easier control by simplication of code and filing requirements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:39 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,368,753 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Well, I'm sure voting day will make any corrections that the population feels are necessary.
If that one statement overcomes the economy, and all the other failed policies of Obama then I am sure that we will deserve whatever happens to us with another 4 years. Try to remember that this old man told you that you weren't going to like the outcome of another 4 years of Obama when he made that open mike promise to the Russians about having a lot more freedom of action after he is re-elected. Do you remember that one?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:40 PM
 
12,906 posts, read 15,722,407 times
Reputation: 9401
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
I have to say two things about your post. First, political correctness came about from the progressive movement and I don't think much about it and too many of the rest of us don't care for PC.

The other would be that you failed to read much of the link since you didn't seem to know about these words right out of it. People complain that politicians are not truthful. Yet when politicians do state the truth, people don’t want to accept it.

For some it is easier to blame others for their place in life because they are influenced by the rubbish put out by some commentators who clearly have no idea about what it takes to succeed in the real world. Some commentators try to brainwash their audience by theorising something they are clueless about based on theoretical text books they read at University. The theory gives them a false illusion of intelligence even though they are deluded from the real world.

Damned guy thinks, as I do, that Romney spoke a lot of truth in that number. Of course, the media and the left don't like to see anything true when they can use it against an opponent. I guess you failed to see those words about what those people got at college.

I was talking with a friend yesterday who got thrown out of a class in college because he told the prof that he was so terribly wrong about letting the national debt grow and grow. That was in about 1970 and I didn't even know the libs had taken over in that school that early.
I read the entire link. The problem is Romney did not speak the truth (bolded that statement above). Oh, he spoke "the truth" that YOU think is out there. That everyone in the 47% is entitled and have a victim mentality. The problem is--that is not the truth. As I've said three times now--YES, some of that 47% do behave as Romney described but those are not "THE" 47%.

I get that you don't like that I disagree with your link. I am not against Romney because he's republican. If he truly says something truthful, I'm not going to be one of "those" people who discredits it because he's not MY candidate. But, in my opinion, he incorrectly generalized the 47%. He was wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:42 PM
 
12,906 posts, read 15,722,407 times
Reputation: 9401
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
If that one statement overcomes the economy, and all the other failed policies of Obama then I am sure that we will deserve whatever happens to us with another 4 years. Try to remember that this old man told you that you weren't going to like the outcome of another 4 years of Obama when he made that open mike promise to the Russians about having a lot more freedom of action after he is re-elected. Do you remember that one?
Who said anything about Obama winning. I make no predictions.

What I say is that if the people think Obama's policies are as dire as many C-D posters predict and those thoughts represent America, then our society will make that "correction" on election day. If they don't believe that Obama is the problem, then that correction won't be made.

My personal opinion is that our downfall is entirely the fault of Congress. I don't think we've even seen the tip the iceburg in regard to Obama's policies. It's not as if a whole lot of what he wanted to do every made it through Congress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:43 PM
 
Location: The Brat Stop
8,347 posts, read 7,266,803 times
Reputation: 2279
Bad enough.
https://www.city-data.com/forum/polit...ing-polls.html
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,421,926 times
Reputation: 7990
Romney brought up a very important issue. He expressed it poorly, although this was a somewhat informal setting The 47% is a pretty important number that has skyrocketed in the past couple decades. It was roughly 20% from 1950 to 1990, and has more than doubled to the current 47 since. But the left & the media don't want to talk about this serious issue; they only want political hay out of it. Such diversion of attention away from problems (and possible solutions) is a big reason why we are such an economic morass. And you can't even blame the diversion on Bush!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:45 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
38,653 posts, read 22,478,172 times
Reputation: 14120
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA View Post
Congressional Filibuster Record by Party 1992 - 2011 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Yeah because Congress had absolutely NOTHING to do with that.
The republicans have controlled only the congress for 1 and a half years, the dems controlled both houses and all the committee seats for two years, and retained the senate all four years.

Other presidents had partial control, or no control of either house, and they got the job done.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-27-2012, 04:46 PM
 
465 posts, read 509,613 times
Reputation: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
If that one statement overcomes the economy, and all the other failed policies of Obama then I am sure that we will deserve whatever happens to us with another 4 years. Try to remember that this old man told you that you weren't going to like the outcome of another 4 years of Obama when he made that open mike promise to the Russians about having a lot more freedom of action after he is re-elected. Do you remember that one?
the thing is for most of us anyway it's not just one thing he's said or done and obama damn sure hasn't gotten it right, but with no real third party candidate we're stuck with worse and even more worse it's just a matter of thinking about who's less worse...very few are solid one guy this election...even Limbaugh compared him to like donald duck or some other character and said it wasn't votes for Romney it was votes against Obama...which tend not to work people didn't like Kerry or Bush but then usually only the fringes go out and vote against someone...there's probably gonna be a really really really low turnout and people probably won't be sure until the election...i'm not big fans of either but either obama has to say or do something where i think he'll be worse than romney or else romney has to do something that makes me think that he'll be better than obama in any way not same not worse but better, can't do worse than such and such doesn't get my vote
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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:05 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top