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.
in August it was 4.19. Good, I managed to get you to look into the numbers and now you know the price of oil goes up and down and is set by the markets, not by the president. Bush did not have a dial, or a knob on his desk which he could use to adjust the price of commodities, and obama does not have such dial either. Contrary to many claims, the price of gas in 2008 was around 2.00 only for a short period of time, and in august it was at it's highest in US history, more expensive than today.
Quote:
This claim of losing "800,000 jobs a month" strikes me as particularly odd when you add up the monthly NEW unemployment filings which have consistently hovered around 350,000 PER WEEK, which by my basic math equals 1,400,000 people a MONTH losing their jobs. I suppose Democrats think Republicans can't add, but if you can disprove that 350,000 A WEEK job loss number, be my guest.
The problem is not that they can add, the problem is that you do not understand what the numbers represent. The weekly claims in 2008 were around 600 000, but that did not equate to 2.4 million reduction per month. The reduction was 800 000 per month.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 10-17-2012 at 07:02 PM..
I watched the debate with interest but would like to see America have a more mature debate on the middle-East. Why is how hostile and confrontational you are in the wake of a terroist attack seen as a barometer of how well equipped an American President is to deal with a situation? I'd like to see America ditch this kind of gung-ho cowboy nonsense.
You might not feel it in America but this kind of ambivalence for the victims of drone attacks on the one hand but fireball damnation for revenge whatever the "collateral damage" just bemuses me. Catch the criminals who commited this crime by all means but why draw a wedge between humanity likewe're still in the middle-ages? If America is a democracy to aspire to it should uphold democratic principles and standards.
And what was Romney doing on China? What is this agressive approach going to achieve? American corporations aren't going to relocate away from slave wages. Romney is doing nothing to block corporations from moving jobs to China. Obama even held his hands up and came out with all that Clinton bluster about high-tech jobs and manufacturing. Neither had much of a credible stance on this issue and Romney was just full of bluster.
China will play to the gallery at home. America will say it is putting pressure on China. Both will point the finger at the other. China will say America is envious. America will play tough with China. Both will shake hands behind closed doors and get on with it.
China are going to run their economy anyway they damn please. There is no market formula that every country has to adopt. Listen, if America had reservations about restrictions of freedom in China or wanted to prevent America offshoring jobs to China as a result of the kind of economic protectionism integral to the Chinese economy then the American corporations who were benefiting from offshoring didn't make these reservations clear at the time. Within a country's own borders a country can do what it damn pleases.
As for Romney, trying to capitalise on a terrorist incident to discredit a President is a pretty low blow and not befitting an American President in my opinion.
I don't see where Romney really scored in the debate. Even if you agree (and I don't) that Libya was fertile ground for him he fluffed his lines and blew it. I thought Romney was the slick, telemarketing presentation machine. The pitch perfect businessman who knew how to rouse the boardroom and replicate the tough talking machismo of the CEO on an international level as President of America.
After hearing so much about Romney after the first debate all I have to say is that Obama must have had a real burnout first time round to get so overwhelmingly beaten by the second hand car salesmen schtick of Romney.
What was he doing with the pension jibe? Talk about setting himself up for an open goal. Obama making the crack that for the only time got the room laughing too.
I got what I expected from Romney but Obama disappointed me. On gun control they were both pitifully apologetic. On economics they both leaned towards Chicago School orthodoxy of the kind of policies that created this mess. There were times when Romney was open for a knock out blow and Obama just seemed to try and outflank him on his own turf rather than making the argument openly for a more balanced economy.
Obama edged it on the oil debate, especially when pointing out that alot of the leases were just held by wealthy interests "sitting" on their interests and not actively doing anything to help the situation in America but were simply waiting until the day when they could maximise their profits. What amazed me though is that the New Orleans oil flood disaster has been so easily forgotten so quickly. I was amazed that Obama didn't have the integrity to stand up for regulations that are needed to prevent this kind of disaster happening again. At times he seemed as much in thrall to his Wall Street backers as Romney.
Education was the key blow at the end of the debate and Obama's final speech was the second blow of any real tangible impact. There were no knock out blows as such (and this will be the last of the cliched boxing analogies er, I hope) but Obama was more polished and seized the initiative in the two most memorable moments of the debate, making Romney look insensitive on the Libya question and then making the argument that catapulted the resonance of the kind of people Romney was willing to ignore in his vision of America.
As I can't see the international debate having as much impact on an American audience as this all encompassing debate then the debate was a key victory for Obama. All he really needed to do was reclaim some of the ground lost after the first debate. A draw would have sufficed. That he has won has reduced significantly the impact of the first debate.
As the Romney bounce (which has already started to level off amongst bookmakers) fades and the Obama bounce from this debate begins to become reflected in the polls then I think Obama will have the edge when America polls come election day.
Well said.
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.
Well said.
