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.
Typical liberal diversionary tactics- You are more concerned with "your party" occupying the White House, rather than competent leadership and the prosperity of the nation. Falling incomes and a lower standard of living is perfectly fine for you, as long as there is a liberal in the White House. This, of course, is the definition of insanity. It used to be that citizens voted for candidates who would IMPROVE the standard of living of citizens in the US. Liberals now vote for the opposite.
1. Liberals will vote for another liberal, despite the continued failure of liberal policy, which will cause further
a. declines in income
b. lower standards of living
c. lower savings
d. more people on food stamps
e. higher unemployment
2. I still have an upside down flag
3. I still fly the Gadsen flag
4. I have property outside of the US, as well as a primary residence and farm in the US. We will have to see where we end up, depending on US policy. We have several "toes in the water".
YOU, on the other hand, WILL VOTE FOR ANOTHER LIBERAL in 2016 and thus ensure your desire for more assured economic misery for the US! Only a fool, after eight years of failed policy, would vote for four more years of misery.
THAT IS THE QUESTION OF THIS THREAD! YOU, OF COURSE, WILL VOTE FOR ANOTHER LIBERAL, INSPITE OF THE FAILURES OF LIBERALISM AND THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE NATION.
I would offer that only an idiot would vote for partisan politics, despite abject failure. Perhaps you should re-examine your political stance and the implications that your views have on the prosperity of the nation.
You keep telling yourself that when you watch your candidate lose in 2016 for being too far right wing.
People need to realize that neither side has the answers or solutions for any problems we face. People jump to a side too quickly.
I don't buy the equivalence cop-out.
One side believes that the economic downturn can be fixed with expansionary policies and the other side believes that austerity is the answer, in spite of the fact that it was a failure in Europe.
One side believes that the deficit is still rising, contrary to fact that it is falling.
One side believes that taxes are theft from the "job creators" and will result in lower economic activity, even though the nation has had prosperity in times when taxes were much higher. The other side believes that it is only fair to help those who have fallen through the cracks with taxes from those who have done very well.
One side believes that the economic downturn can be fixed with expansionary policies and the other side believes that austerity is the answer, in spite of the fact that it was a failure in Europe.
One side believes that the deficit is still rising, contrary to fact that it is falling.
One side believes that taxes are theft from the "job creators" and will result in lower economic activity, even though the nation has had prosperity in times when taxes were much higher. The other side believes that it is only fair to help those who have fallen through the cracks with taxes from those who have done very well.
This is a subjective opinion. What is your definition of "done very well"? The middle class is getting squeezed harder and harder by "progressive" tax proponents.
Location: planet octupulous is nearing earths atmosphere
13,621 posts, read 12,726,125 times
Reputation: 20050
I bet if he could run for a third term he would still get over 90 percent of the black vote no matter the state of the terminally ill patient, oops country
This is a subjective opinion. What is your definition of "done very well"? The middle class is getting squeezed harder and harder by "progressive" tax proponents.
What tax proposals are squeezing the middle-class? For incomes up to $200,000 your added tax is less than $35 a year. Gee, that's some "squeeze."
Quote:
Roughly 60% of the $800 billion in new tax revenue would come from those making more than $1 million, according to a new analysis from the Tax Policy Center.
If you're earning a million a year, you're going well.
I am sure there will be people who would vote for him again, just like there were in 2012, but what's the point of discussion it since everyone knows he won't be able to run.
Lets face facts. We the people do not select the candidate. The party selects the candidate. Oh they give us a choice among who the part deems is acceptable.
The GOP lost in 2012 because they failed to present someone who could out BS Obama.
Hardliners will vote straight party ticket no matter how bad the candidates are. Look at this forum. The hardliners use the same arguments spewing party rhetoric and nothing more.
2016 will be yet another battle of the hardliners.
If you're being squeezed by an extra $15-$40 a year in taxes, that says more about how you handle your own finances than they government. Maybe buying that 60 inch 3D HDTV, 3000 square foot McMansion, or Ford F350 wasn't in the cards for you
The greatest weakness of the current American right is their inability to learn from their own mistakes.
^^ This ^^
And I don't know when this happened, or if it happened so gradually over a period of time that there really isn't one moment in time that we can point to and say, there - that's where the right lost its collective wits. Maybe it's a simple as the 2008 Presidential race, and too many conservatives unable to accept the reality of a black man beating a white man?
This country would be so much better off with a functional, rational Republican Party at all levels of government. But to use a completely unscientific word, they're bonkers.
It used to be that my Congressman was a Republican, and he was great. He left Congress years ago - he was smart, and could see the handwriting on the wall. My current Congressman is a Democrat, and he's fine, although frankly the previous guy was better. Every two years, I vote for - and will continue to vote for - the Democrat, since the GOP consistently manages to find nut jobs to run against him.
If I ever again have an opportunity to vote in an election where the candidates are all rational, reasonable, and dare I say compassionate individuals, I will still likely - but not automatically - vote to the Democratic candidate(s), since traditionally they have most closely adhered to the principles and beliefs that are most important to me. But I sure would like a real choice, ya know?
One side believes that the economic downturn can be fixed with expansionary policies and the other side believes that austerity is the answer, in spite of the fact that it was a failure in Europe.
One side believes that the deficit is still rising, contrary to fact that it is falling.
One side believes that taxes are theft from the "job creators" and will result in lower economic activity, even though the nation has had prosperity in times when taxes were much higher. The other side believes that it is only fair to help those who have fallen through the cracks with taxes from those who have done very well.
It doesn't matter who you vote for or who gets in, because nothing will ever change. This isn't pro-right or pro-left and this isn't some conspiracy nonsense.
It's just reality.
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.
Only a fool, after eight years of failed policy, would vote for four more years of misery.
