# Poll - Obama (D) vs Romney (R) - Vote



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Romney please. Unemployment the same as when he took office with 6+ million more out of the workforce, more debt than most other presidents combined. Voted for a tax raise on social security on seniors (who can make as low as 33 thousand/year), more civilian deaths than ever in Afghan, exploding foreign policy, and on top of that a lying, propaganda spreading media in his back pocket.

Oh and I'm still laughing about how Obama is so desperate after the worst debate performance of all time that he makes big bird a relevant issue. :lmao


----------



## Brye (Jan 28, 2006)

Gary Johnson, imo.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

I think they're both fantastic candidates, giving much aid to our zionist allies


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

i give this thread less than 24 hours before it goes to total shit...


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

Neither. I won't be voting.


----------



## SideTableDrawer (Apr 24, 2011)

Romney (R)


----------



## Oakue (Jul 16, 2012)

never mind what I originally had here, it's not worth getting into arguments over


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

TehJerichoFan said:


> Neither. I won't be voting.


Good for you. Special interest groups and lobbyists will vote for you.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

I'm a leftist so neither

Despite Obama being a huge pussy, I don't think I can stomach Romney as president


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

Brye said:


> Gary Johnson, imo.


This. And give this thread 24 minutes to go to shit.


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

I'm all for the Kermit/Nader ticket.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Gary fuckin' Johnson. 

http://www.hulu.com/watch/408666


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Mittens obvi.

OP, I would like to debate you btw.


----------



## radiatedrich (Dec 30, 2009)

Jill Stein since I lean left wing. Gary Johnson is a very respectable conservative candidate though - much more respectable than Romney.


----------



## #BadNewsSanta (Sep 26, 2004)

Ziggler Mark said:


> i give this thread less than 24 hours before it goes to total shit...


Challenge accepted.

Damien Sandow for president! He'd get our country out of debt and lead us to the financial prosperity the masses so desperately yearn for.

(On a serious note, I'm not voting for either of them).


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

The Sandrone said:


> Challenge accepted.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

El Conquistador said:


> Good for you. Special interest groups and lobbyists will vote for you.


Great. Not like the popular vote matters to begin with.


----------



## Genesis 1.0 (Oct 31, 2008)

Until 3rd Party options have a viable platform that gets equal opportunity & attention, voting my conscience will literally be throwing away a vote.

Obama or Romney? :bron4


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

Genesis 1.0 said:


> Until 3rd Party options have a viable platform that gets equal opportunity & attention, voting my conscience will literally be throwing away a vote.
> 
> *Obama or Romney?* :bron4


thats like asking which bowl of shit tastes better unk2


----------



## Genesis 1.0 (Oct 31, 2008)

Ziggler Mark said:


> thats like asking which bowl of shit tastes better unk2


That's easy, the one with the corn in it. More healthy.











On a side note, the bets were that this thread would go to *shit*. Prophetic.


----------



## Anguyen92 (Jun 24, 2011)

To paraphrase Mark Henry, can both of them lose? I mean I probably got nothing against either of them, but I keep hearing such negative things about both of them, that discourages me to vote for either one of them so that is that.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Punked Up said:


> Romney please. Unemployment the same as when he took office ....


that is right the unemployment rate is 7.8% ( not that , that is good its not) "*the same* as when he took office" this shows he stop the snow ball from rolling. you said this not me the Unemployment "*same as when he took office* so one more time he stop one hell of a bush snow ball.

the monthly jobs report changed the picture of the U.S. economy in more ways than one, showing the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level in more than three years and hiring was stronger than originally reported throughout the summer.

Unemployment unexpectedly fell to 7.8% in September, down from 8.1%, as a survey of U.S. households showed 873,000 more Americans had jobs compared to a month earlier.

The last time the unemployment rate was that low was in January 2009, the month President Obama was inaugurated.



Brye said:


> Gary Johnson, imo.


 he cant win but thats up to you. just so you know it will help Obama. i for one get the anti two party system , but we need a 3th party thats not nuts. As in the tea party, that is just a wing of the Republican party.( Or the left wing occupied wall street nuts are nuts)

what we need is a 3th party about Law as in Health Care Law or ways to get jobs going not just saying you will but a "act" a "bill" 

"this is what i will try to pass."

Until a 3rd Party options have a viable platform that what will get equal opportunity .a Plan not wing nut jobs.

a Plan on what to do about the wars
a Plan on Health Care.

a Plan on how to fixs are roads.

we need a lot of Plans to see what is best what we got is two guys talking about what that guy can do or what he is not going to do we need more of what they are going to do over the next 4 years.





Ziggler Mark said:


> i give this thread less than 24 hours before it goes to total shit...


that will be up to us.



TehJerichoFan said:


> Neither. I won't be voting.


that is sad and to think about the ones who die so you had that right way to not care.



SideTableDrawer said:


> Romney (R)


just so you know i don't think Romney is a bad guy he is just trying to keep his money .



moonmop said:


> never mind what I originally had here, it's not worth getting into arguments over


it is so worth getting into , no one can bring to a argument but you "lets hug it out" .



El Conquistador said:


> Good for you. Special interest groups and lobbyists will vote for you.


%100 if you dont vote some one will vote for you.



#Mark said:


> I'm a leftist so neither
> 
> Despite Obama being a huge pussy, I don't think I can stomach Romney as president


you think that name calling helps it dont.



Amber B said:


> I'm all for the Kermit/Nader ticket.


thats a Obama vote , most that will vote 3rd Party options will not vote for Obama so they are just taking votes from the (R) .






Saul GOONman said:


> Mittens obvi.
> 
> OP, I would like to debate you btw.


i am not ruining and i am voting for Obama your voting for Romney. what do you wish to get out of a debate . Odds are we just dont see stuff the same way and thats %100 what i get from this Thread is to see how most wrestling fans on this page will vote .this is not my this is *NOT* my attempt at getting your vote for my guy.



radiatedrich said:


> Jill Stein since *I lean left wing*. Gary Johnson is a very respectable conservative candidate though - much more respectable than Romney.


wing voters hurt us the worst right wing left wing its all the same nut jobes. i think we need to think more about platform and not Party.

a Party is out for the Party but a platform ( the Plan) is out for us to see *don't vote for a Party* what you need to do is *vote for a good Plan*.

some Plans are good some Plans are bad but all Partys have bad Plans. if you vote Party you will vote for bad Plans . i will not try and say what is a bad Plan and what is good but i will say dont think (r) or (d) think who has the best plan.


----------



## FosterJemini (Dec 28, 2011)

Bush should be prez again.


----------



## trekster (May 25, 2010)

Ron Paul, if he can be a write in. If not, then Gary Johnson.

The RNC killed themselves by giving the shit end of the stick to Paul supporters and not nominating him. I would love seeing Ron Paul destroy Obama in a debate.

The RNC didn't give us Paul, so we're giving them Obama.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

trekster said:


> Ron Paul, if he can be a write in. If not, then Gary Johnson.
> 
> The RNC killed themselves by giving the shit end of the stick to Paul supporters and not nominating him. I would love seeing Ron Paul destroy Obama in a debate.
> 
> The RNC didn't give us Paul, so we're giving them Obama.




Ron Paul had that stuff in his news letter he cant win on top of that he is way to old i don't know if he will last 4 more years . on top of that most of his backer are just pot heads and that dont help him but most of all the RNC hates him as you said.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

9QA said:


> that is sad and to think about the ones who die so you had that right way to not care.


You're a naive little one, aren't you?

1. Popular vote does not determine who will be the president. The Electoral College officially elects the president and vice president. The president and vice president can be elected without the plurality of the national vote. The most recent case was the Bush/Cheney candidacy in 2000. Thus, this makes the popular vote seemingly irrelevant and pointless.
2. No progress will be made so long as partisanship reigns supreme in politics. That's the main reason why I won't vote.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

TehJerichoFan said:


> You're a naive little one, aren't you?
> 
> 1. Popular vote does not determine who will be the president. The Electoral College officially elects the president and vice president. The president and vice president can be elected without the plurality of the national vote. The most recent case was the Bush/Cheney candidacy in 2000. Thus, this makes the popular vote seemingly irrelevant and pointless.
> 2. No progress will be made so long as partisanship reigns supreme in politics. That's the main reason why I won't vote.


that's not the point ( so if your vote is irrelevant or not you can show you care about the ones who die ) , a lot die so we have the right to vote and by not voting your saying fuck you to the ones who die for that right.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

9QA said:


> that is right the unemployment rate is 7.8% ( not that , that is good its not) "*the same* as when he took office" this shows he stop the snow ball from rolling. you said this not me the Unemployment "*same as when he took office* so one more time he stop one hell of a bush snow ball.
> 
> the monthly jobs report changed the picture of the U.S. economy in more ways than one, showing the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level in more than three years and hiring was stronger than originally reported throughout the summer.
> 
> ...


When I Vote for Gary Johnson, It is a vote for Gary Johnson. I know Gary Johnson has a slim chance to win but to some of my family members and others who die for the right to vote for whoever I believe to be the best choice for President to not vote would be a slap in their faces. 

You also got to be careful what Horse Crap the Media feeds the American People. If I remember correctly, Some retired Wrestler became Governor of Minnesota as an Independent with no chance of Winning.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

#Mark said:


> I'm a leftist so neither
> 
> Despite Obama being a huge pussy, I don't think I can stomach Romney as president


As a Socialist, Obama's moderate appeasing liberal policies aren't strong enough to break up gridlock in Congress all the time. As much as Obama is a disappointment to me, he's vastly preferred over Mittens.


----------



## itssoeasy23 (Jul 19, 2011)

I vote for Obama. 

Even though were not doing the best in the economy right now, it's much better than where we were 4 years ago. 

Look at this picture, would you want this guy to be your president?










Romney is already a rich businessman, he's only going to look out for everyone who's like him: rich and famous. He constantly flip-flop's his feelings on subjects, lies about stuff, hasn't released his tax forms. What's he hiding? Probably the fact that he paid way less in taxes than we do. And when he's president the people who make much more than the middle class will have the most benefits while the middle class suffers. 

Why do you think he want's to get rid of PBS? Because there's no money to be made in PBS, so we might as well get rid of it. No, it's not like it's the best channel for children, he doesn't care because his kids are already grown. 

Obama want's the more wealthy to give some profit for the nation, that makes much more sense. They can afford it, not the people living on $250,000 a year.

If there was one person I would vote for besides both Romney and Obama it would be Ron Paul. Even though he may not be that big of a name, if you watch his political views he's stayed consistent for years. Unlike Romney, Ron Paul know's what he wants and alot of his stuff makes sense and he seems to the only one who would actually follow the Constitution.


----------



## Firallon (Feb 25, 2012)

Romney. No chance I would ever vote for Obama.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> Ron Paul had that stuff in his news letter he cant win on top of that he is way to old i don't know if he will last 4 more years . on top of that most of his backer are just pot heads and that dont help him but most of all the RNC hates him as you said.


1) The stuff is the newsletter that he has been disenvowing for the last decade or so. He didn't write them; stop grasping at straws as to why the greatest politician in a generation isn't worth the time to listen to.

2) He couldn't win, you say?
 WHAT A LOSER

3) He wouldn't last four more years? You DO know he is probably in better shape than Obama and Romney, right?

4) Most of his backers are pot heads that don't help him? Funny, from what I've seen, his supporters are the most passionate out of the bunch. His supporters would probably take a bullet for him if they could. He raised more money from veterans than any other candidate, and raised half a million from his supporters in one day. Also, his rallies draw more than people like Romney did during the primaries. Yeah, his supports REALLY don't care about him. 

5) The RNC hates him because he was the only rational man running during the primaries. They couldn't have someone who wanted to end the military-industrial complex come close to winning, and they nominated Obama's white, Mormon clone instead.

Think before you post that nonsense I quoted. If you're going to talk about Ron Paul, please don't use MSNBC talking points.


----------



## DOPA (Jul 13, 2012)

Neither. Both candidates are bad, Obama proven with his policies with the economy and Romney is just another neo-conservative. Neither bring any "change". You want change? Put Ron Paul in power. Obviously that won't happen because the powers that be don't want him there and most American's are too stupid realize they are in a two party dictatorship where 98% of the politicians that run for the presidency aren't that much different from each other.


----------



## DOPA (Jul 13, 2012)

itssoeasy23 said:


> I vote for Obama.
> 
> Even though were not doing the best in the economy right now, it's much better than where we were 4 years ago.


Better? Obama has borrowed more money in 4 years than Bush did in 8. The economy is no better, in fact America is in bigger debt now so it is in fact in a worse state in the long run.


----------



## Korvin (May 27, 2011)

Neither, so I voted for Other.

Obama will never get my vote. He won people over with his "Hope and change" and "I will improve what Bush has done" speeches and look where we are now. In debt more than Bush put us in.

Romney is someone that I can't trust. Not because he is a wealthy businessman, it is because he doesn't come off as genuine to me.

I just fear that we are going to settle for Obama again because there is no real candidate stepping up that we need right now. Ron Paul has a strong following, but independents never really stand a chance. I'm just tired of the corrupted politicians.


----------



## The Mercenary (Aug 7, 2006)

Neither...won't be voting this time. Don't mean to sound like a cynical basstard, but its just how I feel. I have absolutely zero interest in this election after Ron Paul lost support. I originally voted for Obama and sure as hell would take him over Romney, but don't expect either guy to fix this miserable economy so it's moot.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

I'd vote to shoot Romney out of a cannon if I lived in America, Obama seems like a nice guy but still useless so I wouldn't vote for him either.

I don't know about any other candidates because it doesn't matter to me, but generally most politicians suck up to big business/banks resulting in nothing good at all.


----------



## Patrick Bateman (Jul 23, 2011)

I would vote for Romney. He seems to be a funny guy.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

9QA said:


> that's not the point ( so if your vote is irrelevant or not you can show you care about the ones who die ) , a lot die so we have the right to vote and by not voting your saying fuck you to the ones who die for that right.


Refusing to vote does not show any disrespect to our military. That's some propaganda bullshit there.


----------



## just1988 (Jun 15, 2009)

*NONE.*


----------



## Len Hughes Presents (Jul 6, 2007)

I'm Canadian, so I'll waste time by chipping in. Out of the two mentioned, Romney for sure. But, if I were an American and could vote, I'd vote Johnson.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

itssoeasy23 said:


> I vote for Obama.
> 
> Even though were not doing the best in the economy right now, it's much better than where we were 4 years ago.
> 
> ...


wow at that pic ...Obama for the ones not voteing it so sad


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

9QA said:


> that is right the unemployment rate is 7.8% ( not that , that is good its not) "*the same* as when he took office" this shows he stop the snow ball from rolling. you said this not me the Unemployment "*same as when he took office* so one more time he stop one hell of a bush snow ball.
> 
> the monthly jobs report changed the picture of the U.S. economy in more ways than one, showing the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level in more than three years and hiring was stronger than originally reported throughout the summer.
> 
> ...


All valid points, but I side with Jack Welch on this one. What about labor force participation rate? Why should low wage, low skilled, seasonal jobs be worth anything anyways? Unemployment rate is a bit deceptive. That said the stock market has improved quite a bit so there is a glimmer of hope.



TehJerichoFan said:


> You're a naive little one, aren't you?
> 
> 1. Popular vote does not determine who will be the president. The Electoral College officially elects the president and vice president. The president and vice president can be elected without the plurality of the national vote. The most recent case was the Bush/Cheney candidacy in 2000. Thus, this makes the popular vote seemingly irrelevant and pointless.
> 2. No progress will be made so long as partisanship reigns supreme in politics. That's the main reason why I won't vote.


Get off your high horse. You aren't taking part in the process, therefore you have no right to bitch and moan. It's extremely rare when the popular vote doesn't reflect the electoral vote.


----------



## trekster (May 25, 2010)

9QA said:


> Ron Paul had that stuff in his news letter he cant win on top of that he is way to old i don't know if he will last 4 more years . on top of that most of his backer are just pot heads and that dont help him but most of all the RNC hates him as you said.


Are you talking about the racist newsletters? The ones that he disavows and there's absolutely NO proof of him writing? Ron Paul is incredibly sharp for being in his late 70's and this guy rides his bicycle 10-20 miles a day. He even challenged all the Republican candidates to a 25 mile bike ride in triple digit weather. Most of his backers are pot heads? Ron Paul supporters are one of the most passionate,dedicated and knowledged group of people around. The RNC hates him because he's everything against they go for. He's a true backer of the constitution, wants to End the Fed, go back to a Gold Standard, end the wars, end of foreign aid, send the troops home, had a plan to balance the budget in 3 years without cutting a dime to social security, veterans, and without raising taxes. Why do you think the media blacks him out? He can't win? He won alot of delegates despite him not being exposed. Why did you think the RNC made a bunch of rule changes to keep the Paul people away?

Americans see him as "delusional" because he talks about stuff that the majority of Americans don't understand.

I personally wouldn't vote for either. Obama has done next to nothing in the past for years. I can make a huge list, but I'm sure there's plenty of people that are going to do that.


----------



## trekster (May 25, 2010)

Saul GOONman said:


> 1) The stuff is the newsletter that he has been disenvowing for the last decade or so. He didn't write them; stop grasping at straws as to why the greatest politician in a generation isn't worth the time to listen to.
> 
> 2) He couldn't win, you say?
> WHAT A LOSER
> ...


I pretty much repeated what you said. lol I wonder what he's going to say next? That Ron Paul is anti-Semitic, that he's an isolationist? We have heard all the bullshit that the media throws at Ron. You see how the media tries to find dirt on him? They have to go back 20+ years to find "dirt" on him which isn't even hard proof.


----------



## gohel50 (Oct 1, 2005)

Neither, I don't want to vote for Israel.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

It's pretty much lesser of two evils so I'm voting for Obama (D)


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

I noticed a lot of people saying they were not going to vote.

Can I ask why? I get the same-old argument, that it doesn't matter either way. Well, sometimes that may be true, but not recently. Look at Bush, look at what 8 years of him as president did to this country. There are fundamental differences between Obama & Romney, so if you stay at home on election day sitting on your hands, don't complain if things don't go your way with a new president because you had the power to try and change the outcome.

As for the question. I'm voting Obama, Romney has no substance whatsoever and changes his mind on almost everything. I don't trust him in the white house when a tough decision needs to be made, and I don't trust him when it comes to repairing & rebuilding the economy. Props for him "winning" the debate, but like I just said all his points had no substance. Sure, ideas are a wonderful thing and can sound utopian, but when you don't explain how you are going to achieve those things the intelligent people watching question that and wonder if you're just trying to shoot rainbows & colorful happy thoughts into our ears.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Wow, I'm surprised to see this forums so pro-Obama. Everyone is entitled to their views, but I'd think this would at least somewhat reflect national polls.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Are you talking about the recent polls right after the debate? Those polls? Where Romney is up slightly for the first time in forever?

Could it be that perhaps this society is a what-have-you-done-for-me-now one? Where the image of Romney "winning" the debate has swayed some people? Nah, couldn't be that.


----------



## Rayfu (Oct 28, 2011)

O10101 said:


> I noticed a lot of people saying they were not going to vote.
> 
> Can I ask why? I get the same-old argument, that it doesn't matter either way. Well, sometimes that may be true, but not recently. Look at Bush, look at what 8 years of him as president did to this country. There are fundamental differences between Obama & Romney, so if you stay at home on election day sitting on your hands, don't complain if things don't go your way with a new president because you had the power to try and change the outcome.
> 
> .


How about becuse 
#1 they all lie
#2 I'm not even goiing to ACT like I know whats best for the country (here is the hint, none of you that say "X is best for the country" most likly know a single thing about the subject
#3 becuse once again no matter who i vote for i feel its still going to go to hell anyways, and I cant tell form this which is worse, I CANT see the future I dont have the info needed to get this, and before you start I do not belive there is ANY soruce what so ever, no matter where you go, that is not biased and there for I cant find the info, nor do i want to cause even if i did what good would it do?
spend all four years reasearching then vote and PRAY by chance I'm right?

No thanks.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Rayfu said:


> How about becuse


*because 

I can tell where this is going, bring on the crazy ramblings!



> #1 they all lie


About most things? Yeah, pretty much that's true. But there are differences between two candidates as there are differences between two parties. To think that they lie about EVERYTHING is ignorant, it's shitty that you have to seek out the truths through the b/s but it's an election and it's important. If you care about the direction in which your country goes, you would do so.



> #2 I'm not even goiing to ACT like I know whats best for the country (here is the hint, none of you that say "X is best for the country" most likly know a single thing about the subject


Holier than thou much? You say that no one knows whats best for this country, that we all must be misinformed little ants like you, so it must be true. Some of us actually take elections seriously and do research about the types of legislature and the visions our candidates have for our country. Sure, no one person has the answer for what the perfect solution to everything is, but that's not expected. Nothing will ever be the absolute best it can be, but things can always be better.



> #3 becuse once again no matter who i vote for i feel its still going to go to hell anyways, and I cant tell form this which is worse, I CANT see the future I dont have the info needed to get this, and before you start I do not belive there is ANY soruce what so ever, no matter where you go, that is not biased and there for I cant find the info, nor do i want to cause even if i did what good would it do?
> spend all four years reasearching then vote and PRAY by chance I'm right?


Who said you had to spend 4 years doing research? It doesn't take a lot of effort to find out information on a candidate, and unbiased information at that, google is your friend good sir. Trust it. Use it. Love it. In that order, or your computer will crash.

If you seriously can't sit down for an hour or whatever, and research which candidate fits your beliefs and views on where this country should be then thats your loss. But you sound like a lazy ignorant person to me.


----------



## Rayfu (Oct 28, 2011)

> I can tell where this is going, bring on the crazy ramblings!


Before you say it, I'm not good at english, me calm or any otherf thing would be the same with spelling.






> About most things? Yeah, pretty much that's true. But there are differences between two candidates as there are differences between two parties. To think that they lie about EVERYTHING is ignorant, it's shitty that you have to seek out the truths through the b/s but it's an election and it's important. If you care about the direction in which your country goes, you would do so.


I do care, but you know what? I dont DESVER the abilty to do this, I think its stupid to give it to the pepole, I admit I dont know enough to make a good guess.
I'm NOT conftable having the weight of whats best for this country on me, I DONT know whats best, dont think you should be able to if you dont know

why have pepole vote on something they dont know half about? what logic is that?




> Holier than thou much? You say that no one knows whats best for this country, that we all must be misinformed little ants like you, so it must be true.


If I say uyour like me then how the hell is that me saying I'm better then you? 
you sir, FAIL.



> Some of us actually take elections seriously and do research about the types of legislature and the visions our candidates have for our country. Sure, no one person has the answer for what the perfect solution to everything is, but that's not expected. Nothing will ever be the absolute best it can be, but things can always be better.


Yep, and I cant help with that, I dont know whats best, and since I dont know, what right do I have to vote?

I should vote becuse its my right? even when I admit to not knowing whats best?

dont that seem wrong, kinda seems wrong to vote if you dont know.

It's also my right to NOT speak, or speak, its my right to do manythings
one of those is to vote or not to.




> Who said you had to spend 4 years doing research? It doesn't take a lot of effort to find out information on a candidate, and unbiased information at that, google is your friend good sir. Trust it. Use it. Love it. In that order, or your computer will crash.


B.S find me one place where its not unbiased, I'm willing to bet a shit load of money that you think "one side" is more unbiased then the other

Look up the theroy of unbiased, there was a group who atempted to do it, and now its claimed that its IMPOSIBLE to not be biased.

if thats true I dont know, but your not going to find it on google, the itnernet CAN lie by the way.

I have looked, and what i found was 50 things saying 60 diffreint things, and no way to know whats true, and even if I DO find out it dont mean the guy I pick si right.

and becofre you say "soruces" I find two that say the opssite of one another, go to their soruce, and then theirs etc its never ending, even the stuff by the govement has been biased in the past so you cant trust that 100% 

( no consiprcy therpy, just saying it wont be the first time it was biasded)



> If you seriously can't sit down for an hour or whatever, and research which candidate fits your beliefs and views on where this country should be then thats your loss. But you sound like a lazy ignorant person to me


so it only takes you an hour to find this info out? funny those guys them selfs learn this stuff for YEARS DECADES even, find it funny you can do it in an hour seems to me your the igorant now, it dont take *just an hour*
if you TRULLY want to know it would require YEARS.


----------



## Freeloader (Jul 27, 2011)

Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.

To be fair, all three major candidates have gaping flaws IMO. Even Gary Jonson, with his questionable foreign policy similar to Ron Paul's. Shame, because I like his mindset of vetoing needless spending.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Freeloader said:


> Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.
> 
> To be fair, all three major candidates have gaping flaws IMO. Even Gary Jonson, with his questionable foreign policy similar to Ron Paul's. Shame, because I like his mindset of vetoing needless spending.


Obama is the best of the two thats why he is wining.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Freeloader said:


> Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.
> 
> To be fair, all three major candidates have gaping flaws IMO. Even Gary Jonson, with his questionable foreign policy similar to Ron Paul's. Shame, because I like his mindset of vetoing needless spending.


You do realize basically the whole country is on the Internet, right?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Striker said:


> You do realize basically the whole country is on the Internet, right?



and on top of that he seems to think "kids" voting is bad.if your 18 and you vote that is good if you are lower in age and care about your rights and help out at voteing offices as i did ( i was 1







4 )that too is good .


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)




----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

Freeloader said:


> Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.
> 
> To be fair, all three major candidates have gaping flaws IMO. Even Gary Jonson, with his questionable foreign policy similar to Ron Paul's. Shame, because I like his mindset of vetoing needless spending.


Excuse me Mr. 47% but what is your point? Make it before I assume you're just feeling lonely with your political views.


----------



## Olympus (Jan 3, 2011)

:lmao :lmao :lmao

Obama's won my vote.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Yeah man that hundred million to PBS is gonna solve the trillions of dollars of debt. 

Not that Obama's plan is any better. 

Gary Johnson on the other hand...


----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

Of the two? Obama.


----------



## MOX (Dec 6, 2011)

Type or paste the words _completely wrong_ into Google images.

I wonder who the Google bosses are voting for.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Makaveli said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Obama's won my vote.


that is the best ever !


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Freeloader said:


> Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.
> 
> To be fair, all three major candidates have gaping flaws IMO. Even Gary Jonson, with his questionable foreign policy similar to Ron Paul's. Shame, because I like his mindset of vetoing needless spending.


It might be something to do with the fact that most people have fuck all money and liberals are supposed to be able to help out the lower classes a bit. Not that they actually do.


----------



## WashingtonD (Jul 14, 2011)

Policies don't even matter, so I'd vote for Romney cause he looks "swag" as the kids say these days, and Obama has been a bit of a nothing president.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> Obama is the best of the two thats why he is wining.


That really isn't a ringing endorsement on your part.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> That really isn't a ringing endorsement on your part.


Are you still supporting Romney then?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Karma101 said:


> Are you still supporting Romney then?


He changed his gimmick again so he most likely isn't.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

Anark said:


> Type or paste the words _completely wrong_ into Google images.
> 
> I wonder who the Google bosses are voting for.


http://www.seobythesea.com/2008/05/how-do-images-get-ranked-in-image-search/

youre right...:StephenA




> Associating Text and Names with Images
> 
> Deciding what images are associated with which queries first depends upon a search engine associating images with keywords that might be used as search queries.
> 
> ...


----------



## roadkill_ (Jan 28, 2010)

Redead said:


> I think they're both fantastic candidates, giving much aid to our zionist allies


Truth appears on the first page.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

I'll vote for whatever party has Chad McGee in it.






Chad McGee stands up for what is right in society and comes forth with results. McGee2012.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Freeloader said:


> Rofl @ all the Obama votes. Kids on the internet are so heavily liberal. Some don't even know why they are, it's just the cool thing to do.


Say what? Maybe most people voted Obama because the younger generation is smarter and doesn't subscribe to the extremist right wingers who want to take away rights. Maybe it's because the younger generation is more tolerant when it comes to social issues, like gay marriage, and the republican party is completely and utterly against that. Maybe it's because the younger generation believes that's it's a woman's right to have an abortion, and the republican party wants to restrict it as much as possible with the main goal of getting rid of that right permanently.

I don't know, i'm just speaking for myself, but social issues push me toward the liberal side. Not the fact that i'm some "kid on the internet".



WashingtonD said:


> Policies don't even matter, so I'd vote for Romney cause he looks "swag" as the kids say these days, and Obama has been a bit of a nothing president.


Obama a bit of a nothing as president?

Took care of Osama, something Bush couldn't do in 8 years.
Started to pull our troops from the needless wars.
Improved healthcare.
Got rid of Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Has done well with the economy, considering what shape it was in after Bush.

To name just a few.


----------



## Walls (Apr 14, 2004)

Obama passed the NDAA and people still love him, it amazes me how far personality can take you. And Romney is a fucking robot who comes from a polygamist colony that's rich as fuck and is at war with Mexican drug cartels. Neither are a good option, but it's not like it matters really who wins as all they are is a figurehead for the machine.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Bush passed the Patriot Act, and he was still supported.

Though I agree, the NDAA should have never been passed. It's sad that he let that go through, it undermines a lot of what he says he stands for. But even with this terrible thing, he's still better than Romney. 2 years from now, if Romney is re-elected, we'll be bombing Iran and reigniting a cold war with Russia.


----------



## Shazayum (Jan 4, 2010)

I read and article where it said statistically the presidents that were reelected did poorly on the first debates and rocked the second debates.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

It makes sense, every president probably struggles in the first term as far as having their faults. A new candidate can easily jump on those mistakes and rile up the voters as they are hearing their own struggles with the current administration aired and talked about by a new guy. Kinda like a new shiny toy they get to play with.

And Obama better bring it in the second debate or he's going to be in trouble.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> That really isn't a ringing endorsement on your part.


ya i am a endorsement for Obama whats your point my sig did not let you know that . lmao


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

O10101 said:


> Say what? Maybe *most people voted Obama because the younger generation is smarter and doesn't subscribe to the extremist right wingers who want to take away rights. Maybe it's because the younger generation is more tolerant when it comes to social issues, like gay marriage, and the republican party is completely and utterly against that. Maybe it's because the younger generation believes that's it's a woman's right to have an abortion, and the republican party wants to restrict it as much as possible with the main goal of getting rid of that right permanently.*
> 
> I don't know, i'm just speaking for myself, but social issues push me toward the liberal side. Not the fact that i'm some "kid on the internet".



%100 right


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> ya i am a endorsement for Obama whats your point my sig did not let you know that . lmao


What are your views on the NDAA?


----------



## ChainGangRed (Jun 17, 2005)

Don't think there are any candidates for traditionalist conservatives, communitarians, localists, or war doves so...no voting for me.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> What are your views on the NDAA?



The NDAA Act imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1045), commissions appraisals of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia,and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards "energy security.

The Act also increases pay and healthcare costs for military service members and gives governors the ability to request the help of military reservists in the event of a hurricane, earthquake, flood, terrorist attack or other disaster.

It maintain that the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) already grants presidential authority for indefinite detention, the Act states that Congress "affirms" this authority and makes specific provisions as to the exercise of that authority.so thats that .

moving on to tonight.

Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan are running on an extreme platform that fundamentally undermines the economic security of the middle class. But rather than telling voters the truth, Romney and Ryan are attempting to cover up their real positions with falsehoods and distortions.

In the first debate, Romney proved that he'd say anything to win--even if it isn't true. He pretended some of his most radical positions don't even exist—like his long-standing plan that pays for $5 trillion in tax cuts weighted towards the wealthy by hiking taxes on middle-class families with kids by more than $2,000. Romney even tried to claim that anti-choice legislation was not on his agenda—and got factchecked by his own campaign.

Now, it's Paul Ryan's turn—and he's well-versed in making false claims that are easily debunked by fact-checkers. So will Ryan adopt the same dishonest strategy as his running mate? If the past is any guide, here are the four of Ryan's favorite falsehoods that he might revive at the vice presidential debate in Danville, Kentucky:

Medicare
The false line: No matter what the fact checkers say, Ryan cannot resist any opportunity to falsely claim that Obamacare cut benefits for seniors by $716 billion. That's "flat out wrong." Obamacare strengthens Medicare by cutting unnecessary payments to insurance companies and health care providers and uses those savings to expand prescription drug coverage for seniors and extend Medicare's solvency by eight years. That's why factcheckers have rated Romney and Ryan's "repeatedly debunked" $716 billion-line as "highly misleading" and "mostly false."
The real Romney-Ryan plan: Ryan's distortion of Obamacare is more than dishonest, it's deeply hypocritical: Ryan's own budget included the identical policy. So why is he resorting to false attacks instead of explaining his plan? Because the Romney-Ryan plan would end Medicare's guaranteed benefits for seniors and turn the program into a voucher system that could raise costs for seniors by more than $6,000 a year.
Reality: The AARP has endorsed Obamacare because it strengthens Medicare in crucial ways—including free preventive services for seniors, coverage for annual wellness visits, extended solvency, and expanded prescription coverage by closing the doughnut hole. By making Medicare more efficient, Obamacare is lowering seniors' premiums and out of pocket costs by $5,000 by 2022.
$5 trillion tax plan
The false line: Romney and Ryan are trying to insist that their plan to cut taxes weighted towards the wealthy won’t cost $5 trillion. When asked to prove that their plan actually adds up, Ryan said, "It would take me too long to go through all of that." But it doesn't take long to explain the math behind the plan because it doesn't add up. By cutting tax rates by 20% and taking steps like eliminating the estate tax and the Alternative Minimum Tax, Romney is promising $5 trillion in tax cuts. Even if he eliminated every tax benefit for high-income taxpayers as he claims he'll do, he'd still give high-income taxpayers a tax cut of $1 trillion that they have yet to explain how they'd cover. This is why factcheckers say Romney's plan is "long on promises and short on details."
The real Romney-Ryan plan: Romney and Ryan are refusing to offer details because they know the math says they’d have to raise taxes on the middle class if they want to pay for their tax plan. According to the Tax Policy Center, that would require forcing middle-class families with children to pay an average of more than $2,000 a year. So Romney has a choice: He can either increase middle class taxes or explode the deficit.
Reality: While Romney and Ryan would hike middle class taxes, President Obama has cut taxes by $3,600 for the typical middle-class family over his first term and plans to eliminate tax breaks for companies that send jobs and profits overseas. He's proposed asking millionaires and billionaires to pay the same tax rate they paid under President Clinton, and has a plan to responsibly reduce the deficit by more than $4 trillion. Those are the kind of details that Romney and Ryan refuse to offer.
A plan to reduce the deficit
The false line: Rep. Ryan has accused President Obama of doing "exactly nothing" with the Simpson-Bowles Commission's budget proposal. That's false. The President has proposed a deficit reduction plan that reflects Simpson-Bowles’ balanced approach. In fact, what Ryan fails to mention is that he was a member of that bipartisan commission and voted against the proposal he is falsely and hypocritically attacking the President for ignoring. In fact, the plan won five Republican votes and only needed an additional three votes to be sent to Congress--one of those votes could have been Ryan's. Instead, his opposition helped "seal its fate". The AEI's Norman Ornstein called this line of attack "utterly hypocritical."
The real Romney-Ryan plan: Ryan is falsely pointing a finger at the President when the Romney-Ryan plan doesn't even resemble what Simpsons-Bowles proposed. It doesn't include a penny of new revenues, which Simpson-Bowles outlined as a necessary part of a balanced solution. Romney and Ryan also call for $2 trillion more in defense spending that the Pentagon has not asked for.
Reality: As factcheckers and analysts have noted, President Obama's plan reflects the Simpson-Bowles commission's balanced framework, with a combination of spending cuts and increased revenues from the wealthiest Americans. The President will enact more than $4 trillion in deficit reduction, including the $1 trillion in savings he's already signed into law, through specific cuts and the increased revenue derived from asking the wealthiest Americans to pay their fair share. This plan protects key investments in the middle class while responsibly reducing the deficit.
The auto rescue
The false line: In his convention speech, Ryan blamed President Obama for letting an auto plant close in Ryan's hometown of Janesville, Wisconsin. There’s only one problem: That plant closed in December of 2008, before the President even took office. That’s why factcheckers panned Ryan's attack as "dishonest," "wrong," and "one of the biggest whoppers" he's told.
The real Romney-Ryan plan: What Ryan doesn't mention is that Romney would've let the entire auto industry "go bankrupt," leaving Wisconsin's auto workers out to dry.
Reality: The fact is that President Obama's decision to rescue the American auto industry saved more than 1 million jobs in an industry that helps support more than 1 in 20 jobs in Wisconsin. Since GM and Chrysler retooled in June 2009, the economy has added more than 245,000 auto jobs.
Ryan has clearly been practicing these fact-free attacks. Make sure your friends and family have all the facts so they know what's fact and what's fiction before the first vice presidential debate.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> What are your views on the NDAA?


For the record, the NDAA was passed by a Republican controlled house. Democrats voted 50/50 on it while the majority, wide majority at that, of republicans voted for it.


----------



## MDizzle (Jan 5, 2007)

When Romney's running mate said he really likes Rage Against the Machine I knew that he's on the same level as Sarah Palin on not having a fucking clue as to what was going on.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

O10101 said:


> For the record, the NDAA was passed by a Republican controlled house. Democrats voted 50/50 on it while the majority, wide majority at that, of republicans voted for it.


thats right


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

O10101 said:


> For the record, the NDAA was passed by a Republican controlled house. Democrats voted 50/50 on it while the majority, wide majority at that, of republicans voted for it.


fucking /thread...at least with regards to NDAA. 

Thank you for being the voice of reason here...so much ignorance from republicans


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Ziggler Mark said:


> fucking /thread...at least with regards to NDAA.
> 
> Thank you for being the voice of reason here...so much ignorance from republicans


To be fair democrats do the same thing, well some, I wouldn't lump em all in and be so generalizing of an entire base like some other party. It's like the national polls now, the repubs would say that they were skewed when Obama was winning but now that Romney is winning thats not the case.

My girlfriends parents are republicans, her step dad in particular is a hard-on right winger. So I have to deal with all the rhetoric of ignorance and stupidity, it's annoying indeed.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Ignoring the fact that the President signed it, and is fighting to keep the indefinite detention clause in effect.

FORWARD!


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> Ignoring the fact that the President signed it, and is fighting to keep the indefinite detention clause in effect.
> 
> FORWARD!


how about Ignoring the facts in my sig...


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Seeing as I am a rich arab who doesnt want a job, seeing America's job rates decline makes me happy


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> how about Ignoring the facts in my sig...


None of that stuff matters if you're in a FEMA camp.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> Ignoring the fact that the President signed it, and is fighting to keep the indefinite detention clause in effect.
> 
> FORWARD!


The bill had a lot of things that were needed attached to it, which was done purposely, the republicans were the ones that wanted that provision in this bill and wouldn't budge on it, even if the President vetoe'd the bill it still more than likely would have been put into law based on how the republicans were voting in the House.

The way I look at it is this; The bill sucks, for the indefinite detention clause. It was a shit thing to try and put into law, the President had two choices. He could either veto it and watch as it got put into law anyway, or he could make the republicans add some beneficial things to the bill that would not have passed on their own to at least get something out of it.



Redead said:


> Seeing as I am a rich arab who doesnt want a job, seeing America's job rates decline makes me happy


Blasphemy!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://www.cracked.com/blog/ndaa-biggest-election-issue-no-ones-talking-about/

See no Evil
Hear no Evil
Speak no Evil

Obama was forced to sign it against his will. He didn't have to sign it if it was going to be put into law anyway. He had a chance to make Republicans look bad, but nope! He signed it.


----------



## Hotdiggity11 (Aug 24, 2006)

Obama.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Hotdiggity11 said:


> Obama.


good call

lmao at "Other" having more votes thin Romney


----------



## kimlewinsky (May 11, 2012)

Obama


Ryan got killed tonight!!!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA said:


> good call
> 
> lmao at "Other" having more votes thin Romney


"Other" should have more votes than both candidates combined. Pleased to be voting FOR a candidate in Gary Johnson as opposed to compromising myself into choosing between the lesser of two evils.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

kimlewinsky said:


> Obama
> 
> 
> Ryan got killed tonight!!!


How so? Biden, if anything, came off as child in how he acted when Ryan was responding and his constant interrupting of the moderator and Ryan made him look like a fool. I guess getting "killed" means trying to have an adult conversation while the one you're talking too keeps making faces and over talking you.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> How so? Biden, if anything, came off as child in how he acted when Ryan was responding and his constant interrupting of the moderator and Ryan made him look like a fool. I guess getting "killed" means trying to have an adult conversation while the one you're talking too keeps making faces and over talking you.


so your backing Romney now. you dont know do you? i know no Ron Paul backer is going to sand up for Ryan.


and ya Biden won !


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> so your backing Romney now. you dont know do you? i know no Ron Paul backer is going to sand up for Ryan.
> 
> 
> and ya Biden won !


I'm not "sanding" up for him. I'm stating an observation that I made while watching the debate. Biden acted like a child up there, and it hurt him when it came to the post-debate polls in regards to who won the debate. Ryan, while I disagree with almost everything he stands for, at least tried to have an adult conversation without the constant snickering and face making.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> I'm not "sanding" up for him. I'm stating an observation that I made while watching the debate. Biden acted like a child up there, and it hurt him when it came to the post-debate polls in regards to who won the debate. Ryan, while I disagree with almost everything he stands for, at least tried to have an adult conversation without the constant snickering and face making.


"I'm stating an observation that I made while watching the debate " 

Biden won .

as for the polls the debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is . Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious.If Biden got Forty-four percent of a debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole Biden won .


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> "I'm stating an observation that I made while watching the debate "
> 
> Biden won .


How so?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Good lord, 9QA, could you be any more personally biased? It's easy to see without looking too far that you certainly didn't watch that debate with an open mind and an objective point of view. This is the primary issue with politics. Too much "team sports" mentality, not enough independent thinking.

Just look at your response to GOON's stated opinion on how the debate went. "OH YOU'RE SUPPORTING ROMNEY". The man has a Ron Paul avatar for crying out loud!

You have a brain, use it.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Good lord, 9QA, could you be any more personally biased? It's easy to see without looking too far that you certainly didn't watch that debate with an open mind and an objective point of view. This is the primary issue with politics. Too much "team sports" mentality, not enough independent thinking.
> 
> Just look at your response to GOON's stated opinion on how the debate went. "OH YOU'RE SUPPORTING ROMNEY". The man has a Ron Paul avatar for crying out loud!
> 
> You have a brain, use it.


he is not a Ron Paul backer if he was your not going to see him backing ROMNEY . 

Ron Paul backer = pro pot !

How so? for the 2st time as for the polls the debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is . Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious.If Biden got Forty-four percent of a debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole Biden won .


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

fpalm Donate your brain to science today so somebody might get some use out of it, please.


----------



## kimlewinsky (May 11, 2012)

9QA said:


> he is not a Ron Paul backer if he was your not going to see him backing ROMNEY .
> 
> Ron Paul backer = pro pot !
> 
> How so? for the 2st time as for the polls the debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is . Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious.If Biden got Forty-four percent of a *debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole Biden won* .




debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole Biden won , thats right.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> he is not a Ron Paul backer if he was your not going to see him backing ROMNEY .
> 
> Ron Paul backer = pro pot !
> 
> How so? for the 2st time as for the polls the debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole is . Forty-four percent say that Vice President Joe Biden was victorious.If Biden got Forty-four percent of a debate audience that was more Republican than the country as a whole Biden won .


So I'm not allowed to say anything decent about Romney and/or Ryan? I'm not backing Romney. I'm stating an *observation*. I'm not agreeing with his policies, nor am I saying he is even remotely close to a good candidate. If you can't read my posts through your Obama blinders, that is your problem.

I'd much rather be pro pot than be pro-indefinite detention of American citizens and pro-drone strikes like President Obama. Also, glad to see you support the failed War on Drugs.

Again, let's talk about what YOU watched. What did Biden say that made YOU think he won the debate?


----------



## kimlewinsky (May 11, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> So I'm not allowed to say anything decent about Romney and/or Ryan? I'm not backing Romney. I'm stating an *observation*. I'm not agreeing with his policies, nor am I saying he is even remotely close to a good candidate. If you can't read my posts through your Obama blinders, that is your problem.
> 
> I'd much rather be pro pot than be pro-indefinite detention of American citizens and pro-drone strikes like President Obama. Also, glad to see you support the failed War on Drugs.
> 
> Again, let's talk about what YOU watched. What did Biden say that made YOU think he won the debate?


most of all the %47 stuff. that's all he had to say as for cutting Ryan 

been ok if he hit him and walk out or killd him that a plus. the more you don't let Ryan or Romney or all the (R) talk that's best if you ask me .

i vote to kill all (R)


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

kimlewinsky said:


> most of all the %47 stuff. that's all he had to say as for cutting Ryan
> 
> been ok if he hit him and walk out or killd him that a plus. the more you don't let Ryan or Romney or all the (R) talk that's best if you ask me .
> 
> i vote to kill all (R)


killing is a bit much . lol


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

For the love of God.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> For the love of God.


yep your a (R) Talking about god.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Barack Obama talks about God. Is he a Republican?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Pretty sure both VP candidates fielded questions about religion.

But yeah no, only Republicans are all about God. I guess you never watch C-Span and see Congress opening up with prayers. Dems and Republicans alike.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

This thread needs to be aborted.

Biden looked like a fool up there, laughing and rolling his eyes, what policies did he lay out for the next four years besides raising TAXES? Ryan didn't do much better, he has the eyes of a cold, lifeless serial killer. He tried to have a grown up conversation with Biden, and he continued to be rudely interrupted over and over again.

If you listened to this debate on radio and paid attention only to SUBSTANCE, I think Biden won. But viewing it on TV, Ryan looked more disciplined and vice presidential.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

If only Republicans believe in God, then I guess we have NEVER had a Democrat as President. P. sure every President has mentioned God.

Obama and Biden are Democrats in Name Only! Alert MSNBC QUICK!!!!


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Headlines for all the major papers tomorrow:

"*MSNBC closes doors after discovery that Obama/Biden are REPUBLICANS*"


----------



## Jobberwacky (Feb 3, 2012)

75% Voted for CFR puppets fpalm


----------



## TNABritishBootCamp (Sep 3, 2012)

Biden won


----------



## eddiefan (Dec 17, 2010)

Biden's antics with the laughing and interrupting didn't really bother me all that much because some of Ryan's comments brought out the same reactions from me. Biden won based off the strength of what he said. Didn't like Ryan's comments during the Iran questions. Too much talk of how we need to keep our image by going to war. He held his own on issues like Syria and abortion tho. 

Biden did the best he could to make up for Obama's gaffe last week but only Obama can save Obama right now. Another bad performance from him next week will have Romney feeling quite confident about his chances.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

^At least Paul Ryan had the decency to attempt to have an adult conversation.


----------



## Stax Classic (May 27, 2010)

Ain't voting for no socialist ever, and Obama is worse of the two, plus he's a ....... Voting for anyone else is a waste of the vote, and anyone who votes so should be shot for stupidity.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

It's Autumn, so don't forget to go outside and watch the beautiful changing of Mit Romney's positions.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Everybody haaaaatesss Miiiiiiiiiitt.....


----------



## JihadJake (Sep 17, 2012)

I'm Canadian so I just went with other.. they should put Tim Horton in charge!


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> How so? Biden, if anything, came off as child in how he acted when Ryan was responding and his constant interrupting of the moderator and Ryan made him look like a fool. I guess getting "killed" means trying to have an adult conversation while the one you're talking too keeps making faces and over talking you.


And what would you say about the first debate between Mitt & Obama?

I mean this quote here makes me want to do a Biden laugh and shake of the head. Mitt Romney acted like a jerk in the first debate, interrupting and everything, yet he was looked at as stronger than Obama because of this. Now you want to switch that around and say that Biden doing basically the same thing means he is just an asshole who lost the debate 

How Ryan could be seen winning a debate in which he dodged question after question, even dodging the moderator when she specifically asked him for specifics about his answers, I just don't understand that way of thinking. It's been clear that both Mitt and Ryan have no substance and no facts to back up anything they are saying, and I hope Obama presses ole Mittens on this in the next debate.

For me personally, Obama's debate left me feeling down and not really fired up anymore at all. But Biden reinvigorated me, set the fire under my feet again, and i'm feeling good again about this ticket. THAT is exactly what they needed, they needed to show their supporters that they WILL fight back and not sit there and take it. If I was Obama I would literally look Mittens in the eyes and demand that he explain his policies, explain how he intends to do his plans without burdening the middle class like he claims he can. Because if Mittens thinks the American people are stupid enough to just grab onto his idea with no substance behind it, then that's just a slap in the face.


----------



## Game1778 (Aug 19, 2004)

Romney


----------



## Bubzeh (May 25, 2011)

Obama sucks.

#AnyoneButObama


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Johnson, but if I had to choose between the douche and the turd sandwich, I'd take four more years any day of the week. Just the thought of a Romney term is terrifying.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Whoa, four years of Romney is becoming more and more likely. This is the first time I even imagined that Romney might win.

The thought of Romney as president is fucking frightening.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

lol he's not winning. Obama can miserably fail in the rest of the debates and still win the election.


----------



## Bubzeh (May 25, 2011)




----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Headliner said:


> lol he's not winning. Obama can miserably fail in the rest of the debates and still win the election.


I had the same view as you did until after the debate and the poll numbers came out. It is frightening to think that people were swayed by that one debate, and that Romney gained a lot of traction from it. If Obama fails in the rest of 'em then I fear that Romney has a legit chance of winning, and if he does, well... maybe the Apocalypse isn't that far off after all.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

O10101 said:


> If I was Obama I would literally look Mittens in the eyes and demand that he explain his policies, explain how he intends to do his plans without burdening the middle class like he claims he can. Because if Mittens thinks the American people are stupid enough to just grab onto his idea with no substance behind it, then that's just a slap in the face.


Actually, they are stupid enough. They did so with Obama's "hope and change" rhetoric that had zero substance behind it, yet you want Romney to show substance? You expect far too much from the two party system. 

19 hours later, still waiting for Biden to answer that question about Libya.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

If she stood a chance of course.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

O10101 said:


> I had the same view as you did until after the debate and the poll numbers came out. It is frightening to think that people were swayed by that one debate, and that Romney gained a lot of traction from it. If Obama fails in the rest of 'em then I fear that Romney has a legit chance of winning, and if he does, well... maybe the Apocalypse isn't that far off after all.


just one more debate lets not for get bush lost all his debates yet won .


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Saul GOONman said:


> 19 hours later, still waiting for Biden to answer that question about Libya.


Might as well forget it, he's not going to answer. I'm still shocked as to why there isn't more outrage about this Libya controversy.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

TREMENDOUS.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Roger Sterling said:


> Might as well forget it, he's not going to answer. I'm still shocked as to why there isn't more outrage about this Libya controversy.


If this happened under Bush, the media would be all over it.

Can't have anything truly negative about Obama see the light of day, though.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

If that were Cheney or Ryan laughing and interrupting during the debate, you would expect Olbermann-esque rants all across the media.

MSNBC preaching that Biden "dismantled" Ryan on all of the issues, yet the word "Libya" never comes up during their rants and raves. Biden directly contradicting the State Department's testimony on Capitol Hill about Libya isn't getting coverage either :hmm:


----------



## itssoeasy23 (Jul 19, 2011)

Still going to vote for Mitt Romney?


----------



## Evolution (Sep 23, 2005)

I want Romney to win just to see what happens tbh.

Also Obama will win, then his wife will run and win for two terms so I'd say America is looking at CHANGE for the next 8-12 years at least.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

itssoeasy23 said:


> Still going to vote for Mitt Romney?


good video man and its good to see Obama wining this poll on this Thread by so much !!


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

After much soul-searching...I'm voting for Romney. I like Obama as a person, but he's not done the job we need as President. We have our deficit and national debt skyrocketing, we also have enemies who no longer respect us and friends who feel betrayed. 

The whole thing with Libya really pushed me over the edge. If that was Bush, I guarantee every single newspaper in the country would have demanded for his impeachment. 

Time has come and gone for compromise, we need someone who is going to start making the hard decisions to cut spending and all that we can out of the government that is non-essential. Meanwhile, Obama is worried about Sesame Street and the CPB, which BTW could survive without government funding as the CPB/NPR/PBS budget is $4 trillion, with federal funding being about $445 million. Sesame Street is a big enough cash cow that it would survive on its own.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

BruiserKC said:


> After much soul-searching...I'm voting for Romney. I like Obama as a person, but he's not *done the job* we need as President. We have our deficit and national debt skyrocketing, we also have enemies who no longer respect us and friends who feel betrayed.
> 
> The whole thing with Libya really pushed me over the edge. If that was Bush, I guarantee every single newspaper in the country would have demanded for his impeachment.
> 
> Time has come and gone for compromise, we need someone who is going to start making the hard decisions to cut spending and all that we can out of the government that is non-essential. Meanwhile, Obama is worried about Sesame Street and the CPB, which BTW could survive without government funding as the CPB/NPR/PBS budget is $4 trillion, with federal funding being about $445 million. Sesame Street is a big enough cash cow that it would survive on its own.


he did his job .... my sig


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

9QA said:


> he did his job .... my sig


Wall Street reform...not a single exec goes to prison on Obama's watch. Guys like Madoff and Lay were nailed to the wall during Bush's tenure. 

Obamacare...complete takeover of the national health care system, a violation of the Constitution and infringement upon our rights everywhere. 

Osama Bin Laden died...thanks to the foundation laid by previous administration. 

Improved America's image...makes us seem soft and pathetic. Nations like Iran, North Korea, and Venezuela thumb their nose at us while we do nothing. Meanwhile, we alienate friends like Britain and Israel in our attempt to pacify our enemies. 

I almost forgot...the disregard of our Constitution by passing his version of the DREAM Act without asking Congress, not to mention an attack on Libya without Congressional approval. 

As for the numbers...there's more than just 7.8%. This doesn't take into account all the people who have given up trying to find work and have fallen off the numbers. Our actual unemployment rate is probably closer to 13%. But of course, Obama is getting the numbers fudged as he is desperate to get elected.


----------



## Rockstar (Jul 5, 2007)

If I were an American citizen I would be voting Obama.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> he did his job .... my sig


Is it possible to have an adult conversation with you?


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

9QA said:


> he did his job .... my sig


So 7.8% unemployment is acceptable to you?

Trillion dollar deficits are acceptable to you? 16 trillion dollar debt is acceptable to you?

Weak national security is acceptable to you? Looking like bafoons on Libya is acceptable to you?

Raising taxes during a recession is acceptable to you?

Answer each one of these without referring to your liberal talking points.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

Honestly, 7.8 unemployment isn't that bad. It's not good but it isn't that bad either. Before FDR first took office in 1932, the Republicans left us with a 23.6% unemployment rate. I remember recently when it was over 9%! Now we've got it down to 7.8% and people want to complain like nothing is being done? Obviously something is being done. Are there politicians out there that could do a lot better job than Obama is doing? Absolutely but Romney is not one of them.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

:lmao at how liberal this place is. Hardly a surprise.

Could you be a more stereotypical demographic if you tried? 

Also, another :lmao at the posters on here with their Obama sigs and pics, you realise that a tiny percentage of people on here will actually either be old enough to vote or will even bother to vote? (as most young people dont) You ain't persuading anybody guys.

Personally, and I've said this before, the main reason I want Obama to lose is to see the reaction from the smug, up-their-own-backsides, love the smell of their own shit, self-righteous, brainwashed, hypocritical, white liberals and in particular the riots and violence which will no doubt come from black America destroying their own neighbourhoods and communities (that will happen, make no doubt about it).

Its gonna be one hell of a show. I'm getting the popcorn ready.

Again, I'm not a big Romney fan as he is completely in the pockets of Zionists and Isreal, but seeing the reaction from Obama supporters and the race riots from 'Obamas sons' will be great entertainment. 

Let the games begin :lol

(A word of advice in all seriousness people, I'd get a gun if you are old enough and live somewhere where its legal if you dont already have one as you may well be needing it if you live in heavily 'enriched' areas when he loses, because I'm telling you now that all hell will break loose when those people realise their welfare, food stamps and free healthcare is going to be taken away)


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

This is why Romney's not going to win:


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

#Mark said:


> Whoa, four years of Romney is becoming more and more likely. This is the first time I even imagined that Romney might win.
> 
> The thought of Romney as president is fucking frightening.


The fact that he's even made it this far says a lot about this country.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

Headliner said:


> This is why Romney's not going to win:


I'd suggest its more racist that 95% of blacks voted for a man purely based on his skin colour. I could of sworn MLK said that people should do the complete opposite of that? 'Judge a man by his character and not the colour of his skin' wasn't it?

Obviously black Americans dont agree.

Romney can win with 0% of the black and hispanic vote and 69% of the white vote. Perhaps unlikely, but not impossible with the division that Obama has caused.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Not nearly as racist. To be honest, you can't blame them. There's too many racists on the republican side for them to gain any positive strides. Any good thing they do will always be overshadowed by these supporters. People pay attention to that stuff. Same shit happened 4 years ago with racist supporters.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Will putting the white back in the white house get us back in the black?


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

9QA said:


> The NDAA Act imposes new economic sanctions against Iran (section 1045), commissions appraisals of the military capabilities of countries such as Iran, China, and Russia,and refocuses the strategic goals of NATO towards "energy security.
> 
> The Act also increases pay and healthcare costs for military service members and gives governors the ability to request the help of military reservists in the event of a hurricane, earthquake, flood, terrorist attack or other disaster.
> 
> ...


Nice copy and paste job. You really showed your intellect there.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

King_Of_This_World said:


> I'd suggest its more racist that 95% of blacks voted for a man purely based on his skin colour. I could of sworn MLK said that people should do the complete opposite of that? 'Judge a man by his character and not the colour of his skin' wasn't it?
> 
> Obviously black Americans dont agree.
> 
> Romney can win with 0% of the black and hispanic vote and 69% of the white vote. Perhaps unlikely, but not impossible with the division that Obama has caused.


I thinks it's amazingly fun that you just don't even consider that the large majority of the black vote goes Democrat each election. But, no, lets not even talk about that.. lets steer this entire thing to a race related issue and show our angry confederate waving ignorant side!



King_Of_This_World said:


> :lmao at how liberal this place is. Hardly a surprise.


Little late to the show, my friend, this was brought up before and put to rest. People are mostly liberal on a wrestling forum because it's mostly younger Americans, and the younger generation is all about social freedom. I'm not going into a ton of detail, I did this before, look for yourself.



> Also, another :lmao at the posters on here with their Obama sigs and pics, you realise that a tiny percentage of people on here will actually either be old enough to vote or will even bother to vote? (as most young people dont) You ain't persuading anybody guys.


Can't really speak for everybody, but me personally I just though this was a place for discussion. Perhaps i'm wrong, but that's what a forum seems to be for to me. Who knows.

As far as the pro-Obama sig's and avatars, it's election season for goodness sakes. When a new movie comes out, such as Batman, people like to use those on here as well to show their appreciation for the things that mean something to them. I don't think an avatar or signature are made to sway opinions, and if someones opinion could so easily be swayed then they really shouldn't vote in the first place.



> Personally, and I've said this before, the main reason I want Obama to lose is to see the reaction from the smug, up-their-own-backsides, love the smell of their own shit, self-righteous, brainwashed, hypocritical, white liberals


I'm sorry, you just sound like a butthurt Republican who thinks that Obama's going to lose and is getting an erection over the election. And if you really hold that much of a vendetta over a group of people that you don't give a shit about which direction this country heads, you just want to see some people get saddened by their candidate losing, then you are a fucking sad individual who needs to learn to grow up and let things go.



> and in particular the riots and violence which will no doubt come from black America destroying their own neighbourhoods and communities (that will happen, make no doubt about it).


Is racism allowed here? Because correct me if i'm wrong, but this is just blatant racism. You sound like you have a white hood over your face right now, seriously. Are you some kind of race psychic, who can determine exactly whats going to happen?



> Its gonna be one hell of a show. I'm getting the popcorn ready.


Not surprised that this sorta thing entertains someone like you.



> Again, I'm not a big Romney fan as he is completely in the pockets of Zionists and Isreal, but seeing the reaction from Obama supporters and the race riots from 'Obamas sons' will be great entertainment.
> 
> Let the games begin :lol


You gotta grow the fuck up, man. The racist undertones of your messages are insulting.



> (A word of advice in all seriousness people, I'd get a gun if you are old enough and live somewhere where its legal if you dont already have one as you may well be needing it if you live in heavily 'enriched' areas when he loses, because I'm telling you now that all hell will break loose when those people realise their welfare, food stamps and free healthcare is going to be taken away)


What's funny, pathetic, and all together frightening is that i'm sure you actually mean this.

People like you are whats wrong with this country, and listen, it's not your fault. Education is in the shitter in America, obviously you were one of the kids we as a country let down. I feel sorry for you, friend, I truly do.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

King of This World just wants to troll. Ignore him.


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

Neither, both canidates are supporters of the future fema camps. I will not be voting again this year.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Excellent.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

I'm sorry CP you're not allowed to express your opinion.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Actually just linked a couple videos. Not one to confuse posting content from other people/sites and disguising it as my own arguments with expressing my personal opinion.  

That was a shot at 9QA who does exactly that. Making it obvious because he is dumb and wouldn't get it.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

King_Of_This_World said:


> I'd suggest its more racist that 95% of blacks voted for a man purely based on his skin colour. I could of sworn MLK said that people should do the complete opposite of that? 'Judge a man by his character and not the colour of his skin' wasn't it?


You're forgetting the fact that the vast majority of black people vote for Democrats anyway which means that they didn't vote for him purely because of his race. It was just an added bonus. It's weird how you're quoting MLK but then in a previous post you said that you would enjoy seeing black people riot and destroy themselves. 




> Romney can win with 0% of the black and hispanic vote and 69% of the white vote. Perhaps unlikely, but not impossible with the division that Obama has caused.


How is it Obama's fault that the Republicans have adopted an even more hate filled rhetoric and have been using racial politics for years?



Panther said:


> King of This World just wants to troll. Ignore him.


Not really. He was saying the same type of nonsense in the Trayvon Martin thread a while ago (with a different screen name).


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

King_Of_This_World said:


> :lmao at how liberal this place is. Hardly a surprise.
> 
> Could you be a more stereotypical demographic if you tried?
> 
> ...


I've read some of this guy's past posts and he's sending a rather strong Unabomber vibe. Be gentle when you ban him or Jebus might lead him to believe the goverment is out for his still. He's the KKKind of book a dentist would leave in his waiting room to let other child predators know he can be trusted.


----------



## WashingtonD (Jul 14, 2011)

O10101 said:


> Say what? Maybe most people voted Obama because the younger generation is smarter and doesn't subscribe to the extremist right wingers who want to take away rights.


Youth are smarter than the elders? Maybe its this backwards ideology which is why America is in the shitter. Wisdom only comes with age, respect your elders.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

O10101 said:


> I thinks it's amazingly fun that you just don't even consider that the large majority of the black vote goes Democrat each election. But, no, lets not even talk about that.. lets steer this entire thing to a race related issue and show our angry confederate waving ignorant side!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


'Racist' blah blah, same old shit. If you are 'insulted' I truly couldn't care less.

Nobody cares anymore dude, calling people 'racist' for saying it as it is doesn't work anymore. Get some new lines. You even got in a KKK reference, impressive! Bravo to you sir, you really told me :lmao

There is nothing 'racist' about saying blacks will riot when Obama loses, an idiot can see its going to happen. Do you seriously think it _isn't _going to happen?

If so, you poor brainwashed fool. No grip on reality.

And absoutely I want Obama to lose purely to see the reaction from the mainly white liberal supporters, look at how MSN and the liberal media acted when Obama lost the debate, and X that by 100.

Its going to be hilarious :lmao Thier 'first black (he is mixed race) president' and 'savour from Bush' kicked out after one term!

:lmao


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> You're forgetting the fact that the vast majority of black people vote for Democrats anyway which means that they didn't vote for him purely because of his race. It was just an added bonus. It's weird how you're quoting MLK but then in a previous post you said that you would enjoy seeing black people riot and destroy themselves.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You're kidding right?

And liberals DONT constantly use race-politics? Telling people that 'they'll have you back in chains' and the like?

All liberals have is race-based politics, they've been doing it for decades and blacks have entirely fallen for it. 

Trayon Martin? You mean the thug who violently attacked a man and got shot dead in self-defence which he had the right to do?

Excuse me for not shedding any tears for one more wannabe thug taken off our streets.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Romney promises a 20 percent cut in tax rates, but he won’t say which deductions he'll kill to pay for it.

Someone explain to me how Romney plans to pay for the 5 trillion dollar tax cut he promises?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

King_Of_This_World said:


> There is nothing 'racist' about saying blacks will riot when Obama loses, an idiot can see its going to happen. Do you seriously think it isn't going to happen?


I should tell you that the last "riot" that occurred was because of a legal injustice. People aren't going to riot over a Presidential election. 



King_Of_This_World said:


> And liberals DONT constantly use race-politics? Telling people that 'they'll have you back in chains' and the like?


So that's ONE line from Biden. And for the record, I also thought that was an unnecessary line because he should be above that type of racially coded language. Do you have any other examples? I could pull out countless examples from Republicans in the last 5 years (or even the last year). Don't you think there's a reason why a Republican based channel like Fox News is known for being bigoted? Don't use projection in this case because it's not going to work. 




> Trayon Martin? You mean the thug who violently attacked a man and got shot dead in self-defence which he had the right to do?


Thug? Based on what? He wasn't the one with the criminal record. Zimmerman was the one with the criminal record who was following someone when he didn't need to. At least you're admitting that you're the same guy from that thread.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

I think we all know that politicians aren't going to fix the world or any country for that matter, I'd say we need a new system.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

I love King of the World ignoring anything stated and going to insults. Lol.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I find it racist how MSNBC thinks the GOP is referring to black people when they're talking about people on food stamps. :kobe


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

King_of_This_World makes me look liberal...never thought I'd say that.  

People aren't going to riot if Obama loses...I think we're a bit more advanced than that. 

Obama has that "cult of personality" about him. People like him, he's a naturally likeable guy. I'd be fine with sitting down, talking to him and have a beer with the game on TV. I respect him as a person and the office of which he holds, but I don't agree with his political philosophy. 

Unfortunately, Biden is an absolute jerk that I have zero respect for. I was scared shitless of the fact that SOB has been one heartbeat away from the Oval Office for the last four years. The way he tried to steamroll Ryan and the moderator in their debate was just pitiful. Granted, Lehrer got the same treatment in his debate, but both Obama and Romney had a hand in doing that and at least for the most part Obama and Romney were halfway respectful to each other. If I was Ryan, I'd have probably told the VP to shut up.


----------



## The Arseache Kid (Mar 6, 2012)

Paul Ryan is a dangerous man and a complete cunt of a person. Joe Biden is sound.

I'm not American though so my opinion means fuck all.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

BruiserKC: I don't think calling people childish names like "lol libural Obummer lover!" necessarily makes KOTW more conservative than you.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Panther said:


> BruiserKC: I don't think calling people childish names like "lol libural Obummer lover!" necessarily makes KOTW more conservative than you.


That's true...since he has to wonder in the mornings when he wakes up does he go with the Grand Wizard or the Gestapo attire.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

So Biden should sit there and let him tell lie after lie? Ryan told what 34 lies in an half hour?


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

King of the World is obviously Warren Zevon

He called Trayvon Martin a thug for no good reason.. Not sure how much more prejudice you can get


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Saul GOONman said:


> I find it racist how MSNBC thinks the GOP is referring to black people when they're talking about people on food stamps. :kobe








Chris Matthews starts to get destroyed on this issue and decides to just interrupt him and spew out lies.


----------



## ~Humanity~ (Jul 23, 2007)

Definite Obama.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Roger Sterling said:


> Chris Matthews starts to get destroyed on this issue and decides to just interrupt him and spew out lies.


Newt Gingrich calling someone a racist? That's hilarious.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> Newt Gingrich calling someone a racist? That's hilarious.


hilarious as can be lol !! Gingrich is as racist as they come.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

You just can't trust somebody called Newt Gingrich, I have no clue about the guy but you just can't trust someone with a name like that.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> So Biden should sit there and let him tell lie after lie? Ryan told what 34 lies in an half hour?


alot more thin 34 maybe 800 or 900


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> Newt Gingrich calling someone a racist? That's hilarious.


Not a NEWT fan but everything he said in that video was dead-on.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> Not a NEWT fan but everything he said in that video was dead-on.


It wasn't. Republicans have used racial politics for a long time. In fact the whole "welfare queen" caricature that was mentioned in the video was referring to black women despite his denial. It's funny that Newt acknowledged that the welfare queen figure is an exaggerated black stereotype but yet he still uses it along with other stereotypes to pander to his constituency who embrace that ideology. It's the typical move of someone saying something offensive and then trying to make it seem like that anyone who takes offense to it is the racist one. He's not fooling anyone. The War on Drugs was also another Reagan concept that has targeted black people more than anyone else despite the fact that most of the hardcore drug users aren't black but somehow get lighter sentences. 

Here's a recent example from Newt:

http://communities.washingtontimes....ingrich-plays-race-card-trayvon-martin-trage/

_“Is the president suggesting that if it had been a white who had been shot, that would be OK because it didn’t look like him. That’s just nonsense dividing this country up. It is a tragedy this young man was shot. It would have been a tragedy if he had been Puerto Rican or Cuban or if he had been white or if he had been Asian American of if he’d been a Native American. At some point, we ought to talk about being Americans. When things go wrong to an American, it is sad for all Americans. Trying to turn it into a racial issue is fundamentally wrong. I really find it appalling.”_ 

Talk about a stretch.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

kobra860 said:


> Newt Gingrich calling someone a racist? That's hilarious.


Ignoring what NEWT said entirely, I see.

It is p. racist for people like Chris Matthews to think of African Americans when the GOP talks about food stamps. Matthews is scum though and a true enemy of LIBERTY so I'm not surprised.

9QA, why will you not address anything we say in this thread outside of agreeing with the people who agree with you?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Saul GOONman said:


> Ignoring what NEWT said entirely, I see.
> 
> It is p. racist for people like Chris Matthews to think of African Americans when the GOP talks about food stamps. Matthews is scum though and a true enemy of LIBERTY so I'm not surprised.


I listened to him but he just tried to put a ridiculous spin on it. Obviously he's not going to admit that he's using racially coded language. Since you're supposed to be a conscious Ron Paul supporter, I'm surprised that you're so naive about this.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Chris Matthews is a good guy.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA, what are your views on Obama's use of predator drone missiles and are you aware that he has used more predator drone missiles in four years than Bush did in eight?


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Roger Sterling said:


> So 7.8% unemployment is acceptable to you?
> 
> Trillion dollar deficits are acceptable to you? 16 trillion dollar debt is acceptable to you?
> 
> ...


Still waiting for answers 9QA.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> 9QA, what are your views on Obama's use of predator drone missiles and are you aware that he has used more predator drone missiles in four years than Bush did in eight?


 according to the Agence France-Presse , expressed frustration with the drone strikes in Pakistan. In his message al-Rahman complained that drone-launched missiles were killing al Qaeda operatives faster than they could be replaced.


SO I AM %100 FOR "killing al Qaeda operatives faster than they could be replaced" .


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Find it funny that 9QA is being targeted and attacked so specifically, no disrespect to him but he does have just one liners as responses, seems to me that's what these people attacking him are looking for. Someone who hasn't shown the ability to debate or argue for himself.

Again, I mean no disrespect to you 9QA, it's just that you haven't answered a lot of the questions and the reasoning above is why I believe they keep on attacking you.

Lets also forget for a minute all the flip flopping and downright lying the Romney ticket has done, and keep focusing on other things. [sarcasm]


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Roger Sterling said:


> So 7.8% unemployment is acceptable to you?


Absolutely not, just because we support a certain candidtate doesn't mean we hate America and want to see it fail.

But this economy was downright in the shitter because of Bush and his 8 years of destruction. You can go ahead and call that a "liberal talking point" if you want, but it's just a fact.



> Trillion dollar deficits are acceptable to you? 16 trillion dollar debt is acceptable to you?


Again, no it's not acceptable. But if you expected Obama or any president for that matter short of Superman himself to be able to change this in just 4 years then you my friend are living in a fairy tale.



> Weak national security is acceptable to you? Looking like bafoons on Libya is acceptable to you?


We found and killed Bin Laden, how is that looking weak? If you orchestrate an attack against this country, we will hunt you down and take you out. The Bush years hurt our alliance with a lot of countries, but Obama has mended those fences and we are stronger for it.

The Libya incident was a catastrophe. I won't make any excuses for the administration for that one. Going to war with a country based on false lies that were used to harbor fear in the public to gain support for such a war was downright terrible as well though.



> Raising taxes during a recession is acceptable to you?


On the rich? Hell yeah, thats fine with me. They can afford to pay a little more. Go ahead and use the Republican line of class warfare if you want, but the from the top down way of thinking has proved noneffective, we have to build from the bottom up.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

O10101 said:


> Again, no it's not acceptable. But if you expected Obama or any president for that matter short of Superman himself to be able to change this in just 4 years then you my friend are living in a fairy tale.


So Barack Obama lives in a fairy tale?


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

If you want to take soundbites of candidates and show their hypocrisy then go ahead and find 500 of them from Romney.

And i'm an Obama supporter, but even I knew that what he was saying was bullshit. Not that he didn't have that as a goal, because i'm sure he did, but to realistically think it was going to happen was just nonsense. The difference is, I trusted him to try and I trust him more than I do Romney.


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

The fact that other isn't winning is disturbing.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Until "other" gets a seat at the debates, don't expect them to get anything but in the single digit percentage. Though some may identify with them and agree with them, they also don't want to vote for them as they see it as a waste of a vote since they have no real shot at winning and if the election ends up with the worse candidate in their eyes winning by a small margin then all those votes the "other" got were just detrimental.

See: Nader in the Gore/Bush election.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

I think most of the american problems are caused by you americans yourselves by letting these kind of right wing cuckoos have an actual foothold in your politics. I always laugh when i see the interviews and hear the socio-political dogmas from the memebrs of your republican, tea and whatever other conservative sociopath parties you have. In my country the only purpose these kind of nationalistic christian reactionary groups have is to be at amusement of everyone else and as occassional comedic reliefs. Whoever convinced you americans to put these kind of derpies in an actual position of power and political influence was the most successful troll in the history. Also, your "left" party, the democrats, is actually the template example of an average right wing party, just sayin'.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> according to the Agence France-Presse , expressed frustration with the drone strikes in Pakistan. In his message al-Rahman complained that drone-launched missiles were killing al Qaeda operatives faster than they could be replaced.
> 
> 
> SO I AM %100 FOR "killing al Qaeda operatives faster than they could be replaced" .


What about the innocent civilians that are killed because of these drones?


----------



## FosterJemini (Dec 28, 2011)

Evil Neville said:


> I think most of the american problems are caused by you americans yourselves by letting these kind of right wing cuckoos have an actual foothold in your politics. I always laugh when i see the interviews and hear the socio-political dogmas from the memebrs of your republican, tea and whatever other conservative sociopath parties you have. In my country the only purpose these kind of nationalistic christian reactionary groups have is to be at amusement of everyone else and as occassional comedic reliefs. Whoever convinced you americans to put these kind of derpies in an actual position of power and political influence was the most successful troll in the history. Also, your "left" party, the democrats, is actually the template example of an average right wing party, just sayin'.


^Liberal bias^


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

O10101 said:


> Absolutely not, just because we support a certain candidtate doesn't mean we hate America and want to see it fail.
> 
> But this economy was downright in the shitter because of Bush and his 8 years of destruction. You can go ahead and call that a "liberal talking point" if you want, but it's just a fact.
> 
> ...


I don't want to see America fail, I love the United States and have served her. The problem is I strongly feel we're headed in the wrong direction and 4 more years of President Obama will make it even worse. 

The economy needed work and still needs work, but we're again headed in the wrong direction with it. We've seen our debt balloon as well as our deficit. The government needs to stop spending money it doesn't have. 

Props for Bin Laden and I had said on here well done to Obama (even though I am one of his harshest critics here). However, Obama has succeeded in alienating many of our allies (Israel and eastern Europe as an example), while emboldening our enemies (Iran, North Korea, etc) into thinking we are truly weak. 

The whole Libyan thing was a joke. We should have known an attack was coming and defended our embassy. Meanwhile, say what you want about Bush and Iraq, but he was going on intel the rest of the world also had, and at least (unlike Obama) he got Congressional approval to take action there. Obama's not doing so in Libya is a clear violation of the Constitution and if Bush had done that there would have been 37 articles of impeachment or so introduced for that. 

I am fine with paying taxes and I'm sure many of the wealthy in the U.S. have no problem with doing so, either. However, Obama and his talking heads seem to have been hell-bent on punishing success. If someone makes a lot of money and has worked hard doing so, I applaud them and not condemn them. Plus, right now it's been a while since we've actually had a budget. With the whole tax-cut issue being a sticking point, no wonder many of the rich (and others) are sitting on their money right now. My prediction is that by the end of the year, if we have no resolution, the tax cuts expire and EVERYONE's taxes shoot up. I have a bad feeling if we start down that path, what happened in '08 will just seem like a bad dream.

The thing that bothers me the most about all of this is the amazing hypocrisy (not saying you) that others seem to use. I am a conservative tea-partier and don't apologize for it. However, I do give credit where credit is due and when Obama does the right thing I will say so. Yet, people IRL have blasted me for doing so, saying that I shouldn't say anything nice about him. On the flip side, Obama does some of the same things that Bush would do (the drones, for example) and he can't do anything wrong. I may not always agree, but at least I like to think that I bring more than zingers to the table and want to do the right thing for the United States.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

In regards to drone strikes, the Neo Conservative base of the GOP would have LOVED drone strikes 8 years ago. Now that seems to be the attitude amongst Centrist Dems while the GOP's increasingly conservative base is becoming more in line with the Taliban that we fight thanks to the Christian Right's increasing aggression. Mitt Romney represents that old Neo Conservative base while Ryan is a more Tea Party Social Conservative guy. Either they want to go the Neo Con route of interfering in other people's lives over seas(Now some Dems position) or they want to interfere in the lives of people at home with the Tea Party route. The Tea Party IS NOT a good base for Libertarians. I think all Socialists should break away from the Dems and all the Libertarians break away from the GOP. We could have 4 major parties that way. 

Sorry if I'm rambling. I'm just trying to explain the shifting political environment in America.


----------



## Ruth (Apr 18, 2010)




----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)




----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

You know I decided to retract my last statement in this thread. I'm voting for Obama this year because I looked at a few of the facts and realized Obama is a great president. Lets look at all that he has accomplished since becoming president.

• First US Credit Rating Downgrade
in History
•Federal Spending 25% of GDP
Highest since WWII
• Budget Deficit 10% of GDP
Highest since WWI
• Federal Debt 67% of GDP
Highest since WWII
• Employment 58% of the population is working
Lowest since 1983!!!
•Long term unemployment 46% of total unemployment
Highest since 1930s
• Slowest job growth since WWII
• Home Ownership rate 57.9%
Lowest since 1965
• Percentage of population paying fed income tax 51%
LOWEST EVER IN MODERN HISTORY
• Oil drilling permits down 36%
90 billion dollars waisted on failed green energy companies 
• Percentage of population receiving goverment assistance 47%
HIGHEST IN US A HISTORY!!!

• 16 million more Americans on food stamps
Almost twice as many Americans are collecting food stamps under Obama than under Clinton and Bush! 

These are great accomplishments of President Obama, which is why I'm voting for him. I'm sure most of you will vote for him as well after I listed all of his accomplishments. Another term should help obama continue the upward trend in the Growth of america.


----------



## Hawkeye81 (Jan 3, 2012)

I don't live in the US so I don't really care about Republicans or Democrats, although the Republicans are more entertaining. There are some real nutcases in that party.
How can you trust someone like Romney? That guy oozes slimy, bussiness, corporate, politician out of his veins. And don't get me started on that Ryan guy!
Not saying that Obama is the savior of all mankind by any means, but he looks somewhat trustworthy.
That why I such a fan of US elections, I find them very intriguing. Just like putting religion in everything. Does that really matter, is that important in many polotical issues?
Again republican or democrate. Like when the democrats forgot to put God or Jerusalem in their platform. Again is this important?

It really amazes me that a lot of people put the blame on your huge deficit on Obama. You expect that he could have changed that in the last 4 years?
As a outsider POV (I am European). It looks like a lot of people forget who was president the 8 years before Obama.

What are your views on the matter?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Hawkeye81 said:


> I don't live in the US so I don't really care about Republicans or Democrats, although the Republicans are more entertaining. There are some real nutcases in that party.
> How can you trust someone like Romney? That guy oozes slimy, bussiness, corporate, politician out of his veins. And don't get me started on that Ryan guy!
> Not saying that Obama is the savior of all mankind by any means, but he looks somewhat trustworthy.
> That why I such a fan of US elections, I find them very intriguing. Just like putting religion in everything. Does that really matter, is that important in many polotical issues?
> ...


its sad but some think that religion is important i think its important to keep it out


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Hawkeye81 said:


> It really amazes me that a lot of people put the blame on your huge deficit on Obama. You expect that he could have changed that in the last 4 years?


Er, he made it a lot worse. Nobody blames him for the pre-existing deficit. Don't get me wrong though, it wouldn't have been better under a MITT ROMNEY. They're both as Keynesian as it gets. 



> As a outsider POV (I am European). It looks like a lot of people forget who was president the 8 years before Obama.


Unfortunately Obama supporters use this as a crutch far too much. "We had a bad president for 8 years before so Obama is blameless for all his bad decisions". Ridiculous. Let's not settle for "also-awful", but how about "good" instead? Unfortunately there is no good option this year between the two major parties. Not until we get a Libertarian Republican nominee. Came close with Ron Paul, but alas. Four more years of status quo no matter who wins for us. 

As for the merging of religion and state despite it being forbidden by the constitution, both parties are equally guilty of that. Just look at abortion and faith being a topic of discussion during the presidential debate. Watch C-Span sometime as congress opens in prayer that "God" will direct them according to his will. It's ridiculous. What's more ridiculous is liberals who pretend it's only the Republicans who are guilty of this. :lmao 

Obama's stance on gay marriage was identical to the owner of Chic-Fil-A's up until a few months ago, so the Democrat backlash during that whole debacle is hilarious for objective observers.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I didn't know BUSH signed the NDAA.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama (D) 58.68%
Romney (R) 19.76%
Other 21.56%


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA continuing his trend of copying and pasting to make up for his lack of original thoughts I see.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama has the high ground on character and performance. Romney is a serial flip-flopper, pathological liar and and elitist who thinks 47% of Americans are parasites unworthy of his attention. His definition includes senior citizens on Social Security and using Medicare. It includes disabled veterans. It includes those who lost their jobs and still try to raise their children. Romney makes wild promises but tells us nothing about what he actually plans to cut. He supports making Medicare a voucher plan where seniors must try to find somebody to give them care. He supports making Social Security another gift to Wall Street where people's savings would disappear like their home equity. He's a crook.



CamillePunk said:


> 9QA continuing his trend of copying and pasting to make up for his lack of original thoughts I see.


WHATS to talk about ? Obama is wining that's what i care about.

Obama (D) 58.93%


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

All politicians flip flop, using that as an excuse not to vote for Romney is nonsense. The facts that I stated in my last post is more then enough reason to vote against Obama. Obama has spent 2 times the amount of all pass presidents put together on his stupid reelection campaigne, which is of course our tax money.


----------



## flbeachbumdude (Oct 16, 2012)

Wow, who are the 20% other voting for? I wanted to vote for Ron Paul but apparently the guy didn't have enough support. Gary Johnson is okay but he won't win. I am voting for Romney and I live in FL, a state that this election could come down to. But if the 20% who are voting for other would vote for Romney than Obama could at least lose. Other, unfortunately, will not win. If you are voting other, you want Obama out, but voting other won't get it done.

edit: and whoever made the poll, i can tell u are an obama voter, voting is spelled wrong in the poll.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Don't want Romney in the White House any more than I want Obama there. He's not any better of an option. Sad, but true. The Republican party fucked up by treating Ron Paul like shit and now the Republican nominee is a joke who gives you no reason to vote for him other than "he's not Obama". The funny part is he actually is a lot like Obama. Both completely Keynesian, unwilling to make cuts to balance the budget, unwilling to cut military spending, both extremely against civil liberties, both extremely pro-war, they are two sides of the same coin and there is no reason to think one would be better than the other AT ALL. Except of course for those riveting campaign attack ads and debate night zingers. Oh boy, THAT'LL fix the country. 

So no, I won't be voting Romney. Won't be voting Obama either. They're both awful. No matter who wins it's just going to be more and more of the government making a mess of things until Liberty-minded Republicans take over the disgraceful GOP and give us a candidate we can believe in who is actually willing to address the real problems the country faces and provide real solutions. That is an inevitability btw, so at least there's that to be hopeful about. In the mean time let's hope it doesn't all fall apart on us.


----------



## Chadwick Winebarger (Jun 26, 2010)

I plan on running in 12 years. I figure by then I'll be able to run on the platform "Heh, how much worse can it possibly get?"


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Romney has ran on essentially "I'm not Barack Obama" despite his track record showing a TON of similarities between the two's political ideas. 

At this point I'd prefer a president who just hung (pun before the storm) out in the oval office getting blowjobs all day.


----------



## Oakue (Jul 16, 2012)

Some of the debt under Obama that would have occurred under a McCain presidency. Because of all ready locked in increases in the medicare, social security, and medicaid budget from 09-13 that he nor a President McCain could do anything about. This in reality is the case for any President, regardless of party or platform. It's something that Bush and Clinton had to deal with and something that Romney should he win have to deal with as well.

I'm not entirely sure why Obama has never pointed that out.


----------



## Dunk20 (Jul 3, 2012)

flbeachbumdude said:


> Wow, who are the 20% other voting for? I wanted to vote for Ron Paul but apparently the guy didn't have enough support. Gary Johnson is okay but he won't win. I am voting for Romney and I live in FL, a state that this election could come down to. But if the 20% who are voting for other would vote for Romney than Obama could at least lose. Other, unfortunately, will not win. If you are voting other, you want Obama out, but voting other won't get it done.
> 
> edit: and whoever made the poll, i can tell u are an obama voter, voting is spelled wrong in the poll.


"u" is a vowel. Next time you judge someone about spelling try to use the same criteria yourself.

I find it funny that you believe people who support Obama are idiots since Romney was the one who wanted to have open windows in airplanes. Speaking of idiots.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Enough is enough, Barack Hussein Obama.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Can't wait to see 9QA blame the moderator when Obama flops again tonight.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Looking forward to Obama and Romney trying to convince us their foreign policies are different. Pretty sure they're both pro-war, pro-intervention, pro-drone strikes.


----------



## Chadwick Winebarger (Jun 26, 2010)

I want a leader that wants to minimize our involvement with the rest of the world, in everything.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Rafiki Roy said:


> I want a leader that wants to minimize our involvement with the rest of the world, in everything.


Gary Johnson. 

Could have been Ron Paul but the Republican party is corrupt.


----------



## Chadwick Winebarger (Jun 26, 2010)

Ron Paul was who I was hoping to vote for, but well yeah than he disappeared from my tv lookity box. Kinda lost interest in the actual election after all the Primary nonsense.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Don't blame you there, Royal. Paul was screwed over by the Liberty-fearing GOP changing the rules in the middle of the game. Now we're left with two equally awful candidates whom share more similarities than differences.


----------



## Chadwick Winebarger (Jun 26, 2010)

I can only hope that, he's not running now to run in 2016. Although to achieve that, Obama needs to win now. Hmm well I guess there's my answer right there.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I don't see Ron Paul running in 2016 for what it's worth.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Rand will probably be running in 2016, so us LIBERTY fans should support him. Despite the stuff he says to get into the good graces with the powers that be, he is indeed his father's soon; both literally and figuratively. Hope is not all lost.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Looking forward to Obama and Romney trying to convince us their foreign policies are different. Pretty sure they're both pro-war, pro-intervention, pro-drone strikes.


I am pro-war if its the right war and pro-drone strikes.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> I am pro-war if its the right war and pro-drone strikes.


Define "right war" and why are you for killing innocent civilians. You do realize drone strikes just give people more of a reason to join terrorist groups, right?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Im absolutely pro war. We've been looking for more excuses to fuck with America and these drone strikes are a good one

Seeing America's win/loss record in wars lately, i can see why theyre resorting to drone strikes. that way you get to kill people, without technically being at war. Its genius


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA said:


> I am pro-war if its the right war and pro-drone strikes.


What makes a war "right"? Why are the wars Obama has gotten us involved in "right"? 

Why are you pro-drone strikes? They've killed hundreds of civilians and fuel terrorist groups' recruitment efforts.


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

CamillePunk said:


> Enough is enough, Barack Hussein Obama.


lol @ quoting a magician.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Is there something about being a magician that renders one's opinions worthless?


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

No, not necessarily. Surely there does have to be more credible sources, in regards to foreign policy, out there though, correct?


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Sorry I don't think the great PENN totally gets the PBS/Big Bird stuff. It was a tongue in cheek shot at Romney for cutting something that turned out to be totally inconsequential relative to everything else.

As for magicians, they're almost wizards, so we might want to listen to them more.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Er, it's a valid opinion being expressed and a sound social criticism. What sourcing is required, exactly? What is wrong with sharing it? I'm afraid I don't understand your motives here El Conq, or what point you're trying to make. Unless you're disputing his statement that US drones have killed children in the Middle East...

I don't see how it was solely a shot at Romney when Obama is the president and is surely to be held responsible for the drone strikes. I don't know where the quote is from exactly however so perhaps I'm missing the larger context. Seems to me to be a critical comment directed at both candidates and the priorities of the major parties as a whole, but I'm unfamiliar with Penn's political views so who knows.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

He's saying people are OUTRAGED at the PBS comments Romney made. Nah, they're laughing at him for making them.

Drone strikes are awful...and totally unrelated to the PBS bit.

edit: Now it could be that PENN has heard legitimate OUTRAGE over PBS. If that's the case, then his quote makes more sense. I'll admit I'm not totally up to speed on the PBS imbroglio.


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

My point is that Penn and every other hater refuses to acknowledge, and neglects to mention how effective drone strikes are. So quick to criticize, but refuse to give homage to anything positive. No need for troops being on the ground; thus, no attacks on US soldiers. Have the drones not proved to be an effective counter-terrorism measure? I'd say so (I know this part coming up is where opinions differ...). NATO and Obama have collectively picked off and destroyed the hierarchy of these terror organizations on an almost weekly basis.


----------



## The Deaner (Feb 4, 2004)

I'll be voting Obama, but my true allegiance lies with Ron Paul.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

El Conquistador said:


> No need for troops being on the ground


Ya know what else doesn't require troops on the ground? NOT attacking other countries!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

So I hear Barack Obama ended the war in Iraq?

http://reason.com/blog/2012/09/05/barack-obama-did-not-end-the-war-in-iraq


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Romney: "Mr. President have you looked at your pension?" Obama: I DONT LOOK AT It's not as big as yours!! Romney JUST GOT bitch slaps lmao


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Saul GOONman said:


> Define "right war" and why are you for killing innocent civilians. You do realize drone strikes just give people more of a reason to join terrorist groups, right?





CamillePunk said:


> What makes a war "right"? Why are the wars Obama has gotten us involved in "right"?
> 
> Why are you pro-drone strikes? They've killed hundreds of civilians and fuel terrorist groups' recruitment efforts.





9QA said:


> Romney: "Mr. President have you looked at your pension?" Obama: I DONT LOOK AT It's not as big as yours!! Romney JUST GOT bitch slaps lmao


Answer the question, please.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)




----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Enough is enough, Barack Hussein Obama.


Not really sure what you're getting at with this..

You really think Romney gives any fucks about kids overseas? And you think Romney will seize the use of drone attacks all together?

If Romney did plan on cutting down on using drone attacks, Obama's usage of drone attacks would have been a central part of his campaign. Fundamentally, conservatives are more in favor of drone attacks than liberals.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Why on Earth are you talking about Mitt Romney? I'm not a Republican and I'm not voting for Mitt Romney. I can criticize Barack Obama without being FOR Romney. I criticize Romney all the time and I'm certainly not for Obama. 

Jesus, people.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Why on Earth are you talking about Mitt Romney? I'm not a Republican and I'm not voting for Mitt Romney. I can criticize Barack Obama without being FOR Romney. I criticize Romney all the time and I'm certainly not for Obama.
> 
> *Jesus, people*.




Jesus and god lmao ad yall and bringing god in to this.

dont say that's not what your talking about if you talk about god i will slam you on it keep that name out of voting.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Saul GOONman said:


> Define "right war" and why are you for killing innocent civilians. You do realize drone strikes just give people more of a reason to join terrorist groups, right?





CamillePunk said:


> What makes a war "right"? Why are the wars Obama has gotten us involved in "right"?
> 
> Why are you pro-drone strikes? They've killed hundreds of civilians and fuel terrorist groups' recruitment efforts.





9QA said:


> Jesus and god lmao ad yall and bringing god in to this.
> 
> dont say that's not what your talking about if you talk about god i will slam you on it keep that name out of voting.


Stop ducking the question.

Also, if you don't want God mentioned, why do you support Obama? He has no problem mentioning God.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Poll: This is it: Who won?
Obama by a lot (51%)
Romney by a lot (19%)
Obama by a little (14%)
Romney by a little (17%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN 7:32 PM


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You really don't have an original thought, do you?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

And the winner is #ObamaWining !!!!! 4Yrs more!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> And the winner is #ObamaWining !!!!! 4Yrs more!





Saul GOONman said:


> You really don't have an original thought, do you?


Confirmed.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA said:


> Jesus and god lmao ad yall and bringing god in to this.
> 
> dont say that's not what your talking about if you talk about god i will slam you on it keep that name out of voting.


:lmao :lmao :lmao

Holy fuck.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> And the winner is #ObamaWining !!!!! 4Yrs more!


May God bless you, and you will be in my prayers tonight.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I hope Obama does win. I don't want Romney taking up the Republican nomination in 2016. I want a Libertarian Republican to vote for in 2016.

This year I'll vote my conscience, Libertarian party candidate Gary Johnson.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

I think Obama won. He sounded a little worse than Mitt Romney, but Romney made too many mistakes. I did think Romney had better, more prepared, answers. He really stuck to his 5 point plan (which I can't even recall though) which was good. I'm more undecided now though than I was before (was going for Obama).


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Same. Romney winning would setback the LIBERTY movement for another eight years.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> I hope Obama does win. I don't want Romney taking up the Republican nomination in 2016. I want a Libertarian Republican to vote for in 2016.
> 
> This year I'll vote my conscience, Libertarian party candidate Gary Johnson.





Saul GOONman said:


> Same. Romney winning would setback the LIBERTY movement for another eight years.


But yeah we're Romney supporting God-touting neo-cons. fpalm


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Obama kicked Romneys ass. Nothing Romney says makes sense. He has no details, no plans, all his numbers don't add up. Romney is 100% bullshitter and will get us in another war.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> Obama kicked Romneys ass. Nothing Romney says makes sense. He has no details, no plans, all his numbers don't add up. Romney is 100% bullshitter and will get us in another war.


Because Obama is the peace candidate, right?

Oh, and people who voted for Obama in 2008 aren't allowed to complain about Romney not giving enough substance. Obama won off of his slogan of "Hope and Change" and gave zero specifics.

Just saying, guys.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

hey 9qa is that you in that vid


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Rand Paul's a tea partier?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

TALKING THE Debate http://bit.ly/WwVsPP


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

I thought Obama won, but not by much, mainly because the economy issue is more important to me than just about every other compartment talked about.

-Libya
-Tax
-47%

were the three main points that really gave him the edge, in my opinion. On the contrary, I thought Romney was exceptional at exposing Obama with the black guy who expressed pessimism when saying he voted for Obama in 08, but was unsure on why he should vote for him again. Immigration was a win for Romney, imo. Blew up the self-deportation thing, talked about how Obama hasn't done anything except increased border patrol, which a lot of border patrol agents are being killed consistently down south. 

Not a poor outing by Romney, but he was caught off guard and tripped over himself when Obama stood up to him, unlike the first debate. Not a decisive win for BO, but Romney was shell-shocked when Obama hammered him a few times. I think those few missteps by Mittens will prove to be the lasting impression of debate 3.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama saying "Romney would never accept Romney's own sales pitch, as a business man"... 

Priceless.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Decided to make a couple of my recent posts more 9QA-friendly. 



CamillePunk said:


> Why on Earth are you talking about Mitt Romney? I'm not a Republican and I'm not voting for Mitt Romney. I can criticize Barack Obama without being FOR Romney. I criticize Romney all the time and I'm certainly not for Obama.
> 
> CHARLES DARWIN, people.





CamillePunk said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao
> 
> Scientific fuck.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Who do you think fared better in the second presidential debate?
CNN
Obama 71%
Romney 29%

that's about the same as the poll on this site so wrestling fans are getting it right.


----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> Because Obama is the peace candidate, right?
> 
> Oh, and people who voted for Obama in 2008 aren't allowed to complain about Romney not giving enough substance. Obama won off of his slogan of "Hope and Change" and gave zero specifics.
> 
> Just saying, guys.


Obama's the better of the bad duo,if you ask me.
I'm not an American,but I think Ron Paul should run in 2016,America's fucked up enough,it doesn't need another war,and a man with the mindset of Ron Paul is HEAVILY needed.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

9qa, how do you feel about drone strikes fucking up your house and family?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The only difference between Obama and Romney regarding their propensity to start wars is Obama actually has the power to do so, and has exercised it.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

lol at Ron Paul supporters. Like he would do everything he says he would do. Election time is when everyone is idiots and they suddenly gain the ability to run the country because they know everything.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Headliner said:


> lol at Ron Paul supporters. Like he would do everything he says he would do. Election time is when everyone is idiots and they suddenly gain the ability to run the country because they know everything.


Thanks for weighing in, Headliner. Thought-provoking stuff.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

You're welcome. (Notice the no sell)


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

The hard truth that people don't want to hear is that the US is going too get a lot worse, it doesn't matter which candidate you vote for. The government is to corrupt at the point to trust with our countries future, nothing will change until we get money out of politics.


----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

Headliner said:


> lol at Ron Paul supporters. Like he would do everything he says he would do. Election time is when everyone is idiots and they suddenly gain the ability to run the country because they know everything.


Thank you for your irrelevant opinion .

Now back to Romney vs Obama.

Edit:


> The hard truth that people don't want to hear is that the US is going to get a lot worse, it doesn't matter which candidate you vote for. The government is to corrupt at the point to trust with our countries future, nothing will change until we get money out of politics.


Easier said than done,money runs almost everything.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

urca said:


> Thank you for your irrelevant opinion .
> 
> Now back to Romney vs Obama.
> 
> ...


Um, no. Everyone suddenly gains a Doctorate Degree in running countries.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

I remember hearing about Jimmy Carter criticising the influence of special interest groups and rejecting them, rather around the time he lost to Reagan


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Ron Paul is nuts and racist. He will have no civil rights for anyone, and make abortion illegal again. fuck that guy.


----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

Headliner said:


> Um, no. Everyone suddenly gains a Doctorate Degree in running countries.


Sorry dude,don't try,I already sandbagged your joke :lmao


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> Ron Paul is nuts and racist. He will have no civil rights for anyone, and make abortion illegal again. fuck that guy.


Tell me everything you know.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Tell me everything you know.


Oh radio tell me everything you know.
:cheer

dude srsly stop trying to act superior and like you're the only one informed here. you sound nuts too.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I was being serious. Back up your statements, please. I want to know why you believe those things to be true.


----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Tell me everything you know.


:lmao :lmao
Edit:I thought you no sold it,ah crap -_-'


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Al Sharpton and MSNBC host: "WHY WEREN'T MORE BLACK PEOPLE ASKING QUESTIONS?!"

:lmao

Obama doesn't have a plan, Romney has a plan that doesn't add up....kind of sad that we only have two candidates to choose from.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Snoop Dogg's riveting, insightful analysis of the race:


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

I am sorry *Saul GOONman* and *CamillePunk* i have no bad felling for *anti Obama guys* and i hope you don't have bad felling at me for being a pro Obama guy.

Despite the fact that if you Google *"wrestling fans are"* top google search suggestions are "wrestling fans are idiots" and "wrestling fans are stupid" .

Wrestling fans are more engage in politics and top topics thin all Other fans of tv shows.

A poll from ESPN shows sports fans "dont care" .









I have prided in knowing that *wrestling fans are* not stupid and we are engage in politics and top topics .


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

urca said:


> Sorry dude,don't try,I already sandbagged your joke :lmao


What joke?


----------



## urca (Aug 4, 2011)

Headliner said:


> What joke?


What,wasn't it a joke?


See what I did there?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Huganomics said:


> Snoop Dogg's riveting, insightful analysis of the race:


First of all, JULIAN CASABLANCAS. :mark: 

Secondly, :lmao @ Snoop. Makes a strong case I gotta say. 



9QA said:


> I am sorry *Saul GOONman* and *CamillePunk* i have no bad felling for *anti Obama guys* and i hope you don't have bad felling at me for being a pro Obama guy.


I don't have a problem with you or anyone else being a pro Obama guy, I just wish you would provide actual arguments instead of copying and pasting from websites, accusing other people of holding positions they don't, and resorting to rhetoric. I also don't see the point in your cheerleading posts where you quoted the poll results of this thread. Those are where my problems with you reside.

I'm not any more anti-Obama than I am anti-Romney, it just so happens Obama is getting more support in this thread, so it appears that way when I see a point that I feel needs to be argued.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

i got a binder full of women sounded like a straight up Johnny Ace line.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

wrestling fans may not be idiots but you sure are 9QA

you represent almost everything wrong with democracy today and it makes me physically ill that people like you are allowed to choose the president of the united states

absolutely disgusting


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Lmao Romney said a lot of head-scratching shit

Yo, Camille and Saul, Rand's a tea partier?


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

what's more pathetic is he's voting for a Obama. almost makes me want to vote Romney just so i'm not associated w/ him.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MethHardy, red repping me with the comment "fool" does NOT qualify as you backing up your statements regarding Ron Paul.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

How fucking hard is it to google why ron paul is crazy or why is ron paul a racist and check the dozens of sites and quotes that pop up. Paul bots are fucking delusional.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

while you guys are googling that be sure to google obama and romney illuminati. some cold hard facts out there on google.

:kobe


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

What is it with people just stating opinions nowadays with no substance or facts

You believe Ron Paul is crazy, please explain why using sources and facts. Otherwise you're no better than 9QA


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> How fucking hard is it to google why ron paul is crazy or why is ron paul a racist and check the dozens of sites and quotes that pop up. Paul bots are fucking delusional.


No, YOU have to back up your own claims. Stop being lazy.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

scrilla said:


> while you guys are googling that be sure to google obama and romney illuminati. some cold hard facts out there on google.
> 
> :kobe


GOON sold out.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

okay lets see Paul Bots.
hes against civil rights. hes anti gay and seems racist to me. check out his quote "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." LOL. Racist!!

hes against abortion. 
hes against protecting people with disabilities. 
hes against drug law enforcements. 
hes against the education system and wants everyone to afford private schooling and have no standards to aim for.
hes anti science, he won't fund nasa, he won't protect the environment cause global warmings is not real to him, he doesn't believe in evolution according to paul the earth is 6000 years old, LOL. 
hes an isolationist, no aid to anyone for any reason so we are all alone as a country.
No healthcare for anyone if you can't afford it go die in the streets.


That's just to start. Should I post more why he is nuts and people that support him are nuts too? His son is just as bad too or worse.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

being against drug law enforcement is a totally racist policy. meth do me a favor and don't vote, ever.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> okay lets see Paul Bots.
> hes against civil rights. hes anti gay and seems racist to me. check out his quote "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." LOL. Racist!!
> 
> hes against abortion.
> ...


 facts WOW! WHY DO YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT facts!!8*D

global warmings is not real . LMAO


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Another nice Paul quote- I wouldn’t vote against getting rid of the Jim Crow laws.” -When asked if he would have voted for the Civil Rights Act.
RACIST. Get over it. He's a racist, anti gay, anti women, anti science. He's a another old too religious backwards nut job.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

9QA at first I believed you were dropped as a child but now im starting to think you were thrown

Mr MethHardy, continue. What of Mr Paul's foreign policy?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> okay lets see Paul Bots.
> hes against civil rights. hes anti gay and seems racist to me. check out his quote "I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." LOL. Racist!!
> 
> hes against abortion.
> ...


You're quoting the newsletters that he has been disavowing for the last decade or so, even before his Presidential runs in 2008 and 2012. Nice try, though.

He's personally against abortion, but he wouldn't outlaw it. He has no power to and he knows that. He would leave it up to the states, which is how it should be. Ninth amendment, my friend.

Paul has nothing against the disabled. He is just against the government forcing business how to run their business. It is the same reason why he voted against the Civil Right act. It wasn't because he was against those who the bills were intended to help, but to keep government out of private business. He realizes that the business' who discriminate against certain kinds of people will go out of business, either through boycotts or people going to business that don't discriminate. He even said that business should be boycotted that discriminate. He just feels that the government shouldn't be able to tell a business how to operate. If they want to fail due to their own prejudices, so be it.

He's against the War on Drugs, which unfairly targets minorities (WHAT A RACIST!). Why should the government tell people what to to put in their bodies? If heroin was legal, would you do it? Same goes for every other hardcore drug. 

He believes that public education should be left to the states. The states know what is best for their state when it comes to education, not the federal government. The states would provide the education, which is in their power due to the Constitution. Again, ninth amendment.

Being against giving foreign aid to nations that hate us is actually a good thing. The money should be spent in the United States, and not given to nations that hate us. It's asinine that we continue to do it.

Paul isn't an isolationist. He's for minding our own business, and not mingling in the affairs of other nations. He's for establishing fair trade with other nations, not war.

Paul is for lowering the cost of healthcare by allowing people to purchase across state lines, thus increasing competition, and in turn, lower prices. It's true he doesn't believe in handing out healthcare to everyone. If one doesn't want healthcare, they shouldn't be forced to buy it. It's their choice. Paul is a doctor, I'm pretty sure he knows what he's talking about when it comes to this.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

nothing wrong with isolationism, people tend to not attack you as long as you dont fuck with them

look how well Switzerland is doing

O Reilly, one of the smarter conservatives, keeps talking about the rise of a dominant third party in the USA, akin to England. It wont solve all the problems, but I think what people are genuinely looking for is a different voice. Even if Ron Paul isnt the saviour some of his supporters make him out to be, he still represents something different

I think the American people are sick of the ineffective senate and congress, and the sheer amount of control in the hand of the oil companies, the corporations and all the other lobbyists, which the mainstream media is in bed with. The constant foreign wars and interference, and the bi partisanship that is tearing America apart.

Ron Paul is not God, but to a lot of people, he represents something different. A break in this cycle the United States of America is locked in. Anything at this point. Obama promised change, but asides from Obama Care, Bush could have still been in charge and nobody would have noticed

America has become a machine, thats why the two party system is seen as so ineffective. No matter who gets elected, the same policies more or less are going to be in effect. The gears of politics will just keep on turning


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Redead said:


> 9QA at first I believed you were dropped as a child but now im starting to think you were thrown
> 
> Mr MethHardy, continue. What of Mr Paul's foreign policy?


disagree. He ignores reality and wants to cut to much military spending first of all.
His stance on Iran is wrong on all accounts. Letting them get nukes would be awful and we need to prevent that from happening sooner the better. I believe he is out of touch and sitting at home being isolationist while letting terrorist and our enemies gather nukes is wrong.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> disagree. He ignores reality and wants to cut to much military spending first of all.
> His stance on Iran is wrong on all accounts. Letting them get nukes would be awful and we need to prevent that from happening sooner the better. I believe he is out of touch and sitting at home being isolationist while letting terrorist and our enemies gather nukes is wrong.


So what you want our President to say to Iran is basically: "Our nukes our good, and your nukes are BAD", right? That doesn't fly. You DO know that Iran is getting nukes for protection, right? You DO know that Iran isn't close to actually having a nuclear weapon, right? You DO know we wouldn't have these enemies in the first place had we minded our own business and stopped interfering in the business of other nations, such as helping install the Shah in Iran in 1953.

That Ron Paul is dangerous, man. More WAR!!!!


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

I always liked Ron Paul, he seemed to represent what democracy should be, he seems like a genuine person rather than a politican

I just don't like his son


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Why do you believe Iran seeks nuclear weapons?

Moreso, why do you think Iran is America's enemy?

Do you believe another war, this time with an actual determined military and social power in the region is a good idea? Especially one with access to the gulf of hormuz, and the dozens of United States military bases in the region as well as key allies in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain?

A war in Iran is a far different story than Iraq, Iran will actually fight back. I wouldnt underestimate their influence, you'd be surprised how determined those shi'ite muslims can be and close the entire region is to a full explosion. War with Iran will change the world. Not to mention, Russia and China might get involved.

If Iran hypothetically got a nuke, I'd imagine the danger would still be America. Seeing as they started this all as GOON described and only one country as far as I'm aware has ever used atomic weapons in warfare


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

His son is basically him, just more or less willing to play the "game" so to speak. Paul's downfall was that he never did play ball with the GOP, and because of that they ignored him every step of the way. Rand, who is probably going to run in 2016, knows this and won't make the same mistakes. He endorsed Romney for the sole reason to get into the good graces of the GOP so he has a chance in 2016. If you check his voting record, he is mostly the polar opposite of Romney and the Neo-Conservatives.

The Rand you see in the news is probably not who he really is. It's just him playing the "game". He's easily the best member of the GOP in the Senate, and the best one who will probably run in 2016.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

I think Jeb Bush will run next election

fun fact, a lot of nominees try to avoid running after an opponents 4 year term because its easier to win after the guy served 8 full years

a lot of the stronger republican nominees are just waiting for the democrats momentum to die out. like what happened with george W


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Well you didn't really support anything you said with sources but I'll (generously) answer what I can with what I know. You will have to expand on a few things however. 



MethHardy said:


> hes anti gay and seems racist to me.


Regarding being anti-gay, Ron Paul is actually in favor of getting government out of the marriage business entirely, leaving anyone free to marry who they please. Sounds like a win for gay people to me. 

As far as being racist: Austin, Texas' NAACP president Nelson Linder has stated he doesn't believe Ron Paul is a racist at all, having heard him speak out against police oppression of black communities, and describing Martin Luther King as a personal hero of his. Doesn't fit with the depiction of a "racist" in my view. 



> hes against abortion.


This is true, yet he's against allowing the federal government to decide the issue. In other words Paul isn't looking to push his abortion views on the country, as he feels it isn't a government issue. 


> hes against protecting people with disabilities.


Gonna need you to EXPAND on that one. 


> hes against drug law enforcements.


:hb Americans should have the right to decide for themselves what they put into their bodies. You have a problem with this, but were criticizing him as against civil rights? How inconsistent of you. 


> hes against the education system and wants everyone to afford private schooling and have no standards to aim for.


Well the second half of your statement is untrue as he supports all type of schools but how could anyone NOT be against the education system as it is? The quality of education in America has absolutely plummeted in recent years. This is a DETRACTION for you?  


> hes anti science, he won't fund nasa, he won't protect the environment cause global warmings is not real to him


The man who supports stem cell research is against science? Tell me more.

Yeah Ron Paul would cut the shit out of NASA, but not because he's anti-Science. He wants to open space exploration to the private sector instead of maintaining the current government monopoly. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. 

As for global warming, I don't recall him saying it's not "real". He's said there are far more pressing matters such as the financial crisis and the wars. Hard to disagree there. 



> hes an isolationist, no aid to anyone for any reason so we are all alone as a country.


:hb But the more accurate term is "non-interventionist". Here's a good quote:

"There's nobody in this world that could possibly attack us today... we could defend this country with a few good submarines. If anybody dared touch us we could wipe any country off of the face of the earth within hours. And here we are, so intimidated and so insecure and we're acting like such bullies that we have to attack third-world nations that have no military and have no weapons."


> No healthcare for anyone if you can't afford it go die in the streets.


Completely untrue. He's against government-funded healthcare because it leads to higher healthcare costs and a lower quality of care. He is NOT for turning people away who can't afford health insurance, at all. So there isn't an ounce of truth to what you said there. 



> That's just to start. Should I post more why he is nuts and people that support him are nuts too? His son is just as bad too or worse.


Well you didn't land a single point so, yes, you should definitely post more if you hope to make this case.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Oh FUCK YOU GOON you goddamn ninja. :lmao 

Nah your post was better. 



9QA said:


> facts WOW! WHY DO YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT facts!!8*D
> 
> global warmings is not real . LMAO


Where on Earth did you see facts in the post you quoted?


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> So what you want our President to say to Iran is basically: "Our nukes our good, and your nukes are BAD", right? That doesn't fly. You DO know that Iran is getting nukes for protection, right? You DO know that Iran isn't close to actually having a nuclear weapon, right? You DO know we wouldn't have these enemies in the first place had we minded our own business and stopped interfering in the business of other nations, such as helping install the Shah in Iran in 1953.
> 
> That Ron Paul is dangerous, man. More WAR!!!!


I know they are not close but like I said we have to prevent it from happening at all times and sooner the better.
And yes. Our nukes are good and theirs are bad. Iran is unstable country ,unstable government with hidden agendas. There just to much corruption and extremist to allow them to have nukes. They could back a terrorist group like Al qaeda or sell the nukes and we can't allow that.

I have to go to bed now. night.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Are you on crack? you think al qaeda, a group thats dedicated to annihilating shi'ite muslims and considers them subhuman and is responsible for killing HUNDREDS of them in a daily basis in karbala in Iraq is going to get nukes from iran :lmao :lmao :lmao

Al qaeda and sunni radicals have killed thousands more shi'ite muslims than americans. If anything you could put a strong case that al qaeda serves a strong purpose in iraq destabilising the country and preventing the population from making stronger ties with Iran

This is one of the key things wrong in america, ZERO knowledge of the world, the cultures, and the problems, and history

sounds to me like Paul has his personal beliefs, but is content to let america run itself

i dont agree with all of those, but i believe the founding fathers had something like that in mind


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Nah Redead, all them BROWN PEOPLE are in cahoots together to attack 'MERICA.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Well you didn't really support anything you said with sources but I'll (generously) answer what I can with what I know. You will have to expand on a few things however.
> 
> Regarding being anti-gay, Ron Paul is actually in favor of getting government out of the marriage business entirely, leaving anyone free to marry who they please. Sounds like a win for gay people to me.
> 
> ...



Protecting people with disabilities from discrimination in being hired i meant.
cant afford healthcare he won't turn you away but will watch you go bankrupt instead? ok.
yes he did deny global warming and evolution as truth.
Americans should have a right to put whatever into their bodies? Okay fine go lock yourself in a cell do all the drugs you want and die i dont care. problem is drug users end up hurting everyone around them. Some drugs must remain illegal.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> I know they are not close but like I said we have to prevent it from happening at all times and sooner the better.
> And yes. Our nukes are good and theirs are bad. Iran is unstable country ,unstable government with hidden agendas. There just to much corruption and extremist to allow them to have nukes. They could back a terrorist group like Al qaeda or sell the nukes and we can't allow that.
> 
> I have to go to bed now. night.


Iran has never been in the habit of attacking other people, much less facilitating aggression against other nations by selling nukes. There is only one nation that has used nukes, and that was the United States. Soviet Russia didn't use them, and North Korea didn't use them, even with Kim Jong Ill on his death bed. 

Iran isn't a threat to the United States. They're getting the nukes for protection, and they know that they would be blown off of the face of the earth is they launched one missile at anybody. They aren't run by idiots. Stop watching MSNBC, CNN, and/or Fox.



MethHardy said:


> Protecting people with disabilities from discrimination in being hired i meant.
> cant afford healthcare he won't turn you away but will watch you go bankrupt instead? ok.
> yes he did deny global warming and evolution as truth.
> Americans should have a right to put whatever into their bodies? Okay fine go lock yourself in a cell do all the drugs you want and die i dont care. problem is drug users end up hurting everyone around them. Some drugs must remain illegal.


I went over that. He doesn't believe that governments should tell private business' how to run their business. Those who discriminate will go out of business, and will be replaced by those that don't. Free Markets 101.

Again, did you read my part about healthcare? His whole goal is to make it AFFORDABLE. Where did you get he wants everyone to go bankrupt.

His personal beliefs when it comes to things like Evolution are irrelevant. He's not going to put everyone to death who believes in Evolution. It's his belief and has nothing to do with how he would do as a leader.

Again, would you do METH, even if it were legal? People aren't going to suddenly start injecting heroine just because it's legal. They know it's bad for them, and only the idiots that would end up doing it anyway would be the ones to do it. Why should people be told what they can or cannot put in their bodies?


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Stop drinking the ron paul cool aid first.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

seriously? al qaeda teaming up with iran? lolololololololol

its like you think the world is a comic book where the bad guys team up to form a legion of doom


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> Stop drinking the ron paul cool aid first.


Glad to see we can't have an adult conversation about this.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Back to Obama vs Romney since they are the topic. Ron Paul is a non factor now so you Paul Bots can give up now please and get on with your lives.

I really liked when Romney tried to say Obama didn't call Libya a terrorist attack and got called out by the mod. So awesome. Another one with the energy Romney sited a 14%? decrease when it was only for a year and now energy is up. Obama owned him again there.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Yeah, too bad the moderator later admitted Romney was right.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Why are you treating this like sports teams or a wrestling feud?

This isnt about 'owning', this is a discussion of very serious issues between two men, one of whom will become the most powerful man on earth

All the media and people on twitter seem to be obsessed with is 'who won' instead of focusing on the fact that these men were supposed to be explaining their platforms and having discussions


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

*No acts of terror* will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

President Obama,Sept. 12 

How many times does he have to say terror to make you people happy?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> As far as being racist: Austin, Texas' NAACP president Nelson Linder has stated he doesn't believe Ron Paul is a racist at all, having heard him speak out against police oppression of black communities, and describing Martin Luther King as a personal hero of his. Doesn't fit with the depiction of a "racist" in my view.


Most of the people in the NAACP are pawns so I wouldn't take their word on this. The other part is good to hear though.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

I weep for america if you are a typical voter Mr MethHardy

Actually I dont, as a foreigner I enjoy watching the decline of your civilisation and empire due to your own incompetence and ignorance


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Whatever happens, don't blame me! 

I'm voting for Kodos!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> *No acts of terror* will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
> 
> President Obama,Sept. 12
> 
> How many times does he have to say terror to make you people happy?


So that two weeks of having us believe it was the result of an anti-Islam tape sparking a riot never happened, then?

How revisionist can people be? Even in the chatbox I tried explaining how Romney was correct and respected members were like "LOL NOPE HE GOT OWNED". fpalm


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Because most people are ignorant, Redead. Most of them don't do their own research on this kind of stuff, and treat it like sport. All they care about is being able to brag the next day at work about "their guy" winning. They don't care about what is good for this country; it's all about their guy winning and having four years to brag.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Redead said:


> seriously? al qaeda teaming up with iran? lolololololololol
> 
> its like you think the world is a comic book where the bad guys team up to form a legion of doom





> Are you on crack? you think al qaeda, a group thats dedicated to annihilating shi'ite muslims and considers them subhuman and is responsible for killing HUNDREDS of them in a daily basis in karbala in Iraq is going to get nukes from iran


Please don't try bringing logic this conversation. Al Qaeda+Ahmadinejad+indonesian ahmadiyyans+khmer rouge+comyuanizm :gun: Merukah=McDonalds=free market=SUVs 

FACT


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> So that two weeks of having us believe it was the result of an anti-Islam tape sparking a riot never happened, then?
> 
> How revisionist can people be? Even in the chatbox I tried explaining how Romney was correct and respected members were like "LOL NOPE HE GOT OWNED". fpalm


That was the next day.
And Why is romney trying to exploit the death of 4 people for political points? :no:


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Saul GOONman said:


> Yeah, too bad the moderator later admitted Romney was right.



I wonder if MSNBC will cover this admission?


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

I don't know why this matters. Fluoride will still be in our water and Aspartame will still be in our food.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> That was the next day.
> And Why is romney trying to exploit the death of 4 people for political points? :no:


I don't know man, probably the same reason the Obama Administration lied about the death of those four people.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Will Ron Paul remove the Fluoride from our water supply?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I don't understand why the death of those diplomats wouldn't be open for discussion in the election campaign. I don't get that at all. It's an event directly related to foreign policy, which is a major part of a candidate's platform.



You_heard? said:


> Will Ron Paul remove the Fluoride from our water supply?


Get a water filter, bro.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> I don't understand why the death of those diplomats wouldn't be open for discussion in the election campaign. I don't get that at all. It's an event directly related to foreign policy, which is a major part of a candidate's platform.
> 
> Get a water filter, bro.


So you improve of the government puting poison in our water? If Ron Paul wins, is he going to remove the Aspartame from our food? is he going to remove Genetically modified foods?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

improve of the government?


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Tbh I'm not really sure what Obama did wrong in regards to the whole Libya terrorist attacks


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

You_heard? said:


> So you improve of the government puting poison in our water? If Ron Paul wins, is he going to remove the Aspartame from our food? is he going to remove Genetically modified foods?


Ron Paul isn't even running...


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

#Mark said:


> Tbh I'm not really sure what Obama did wrong in regards to the whole Libya terrorist attacks


Obama did Libya right just the right wing was hopping for a war.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Ron Paul isn't even running...


Oh, I wouldn't know. I don't keep up with that bullshit.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

You_heard? said:


> Oh, I wouldn't know. I don't keep up with that bullshit.


why posts if you think its bullshit.

what do all of you say to doing a live google plus hangout?


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Why should I care about voting if shit is going to remain the same? There is still going to be poisonous Chemtrails in our skies, there is still going to be poison in our food and water, and HARRP will still be in use.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

9QA said:


> why posts if you think its bullshit.
> 
> what do all of you say to doing a live google plus hangout?


Fucking sheep.



Redead said:


> improve of the government?


I meant approve. I always get improve and approve mixed up.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

Romney was right with his general idea on the Libya subject. He messed up when he insisted to focus on if Obama said "acts of terror" or not.


----------



## stonze (Sep 13, 2012)

*Barack Obama Calls Romney An Asshole On Live TV*






Lol, Obama calls Romney an asshole live on tv during the presidential debate. This year's election has to be one of the most historic and memorable elections of all time.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

*Re: Barack Obama Calls Romney An Asshole On Live TV*



stonze said:


> Lol, Obama calls Romney an asshole live on tv during the presidential debate. This year's election has to be one of the most historic and memorable elections of all time.


looks to me like he;'s saying any number of things, including "Thank You"....but hey, he said asshole, you're right. 

Unless ofc the "asshole" was audible, which I cant know b/c i have no speakers on my computer at work.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

dear sweet jesus the founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves

THATS WHAT YOU GOT OUT OF THE DEBATE?

delusions that obama called mitt romney an asshole?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Redead said:


> dear sweet *jesus* the founding fathers must be rolling over in their graves


lol omg neo-con


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

makes sense, as a muslim arab male im obviously strong neo con


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> lol omg neo-con


where? kill it with fire


----------



## virus21 (Sep 22, 2009)

*Re: Barack Obama Calls Romney An Asshole On Live TV*



stonze said:


> Lol, Obama calls Romney an asshole live on tv during the presidential debate. This year's election has to be one of the most historic and memorable elections of all time.


Yes, we have never seen an election that has both candidates being incompetent childish shitheads


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)




----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

most on this site are neo-con.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA said:


> most on this site are neo-con.


:cornette

*looks at poll results, sees Obama winning and "Other" beating Romney*

:kobe


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Romney must be allergic to the truth. He avoids it like he is, anyway.Obama landed a clean hit on Romney over his opposition to the federal bailout of Chrysler and General Motors.Instead of letting the moment pass and moving on to the next question, Romney decided to once again relitigate the auto bailout, a measure supported by a large majority of voters in the presidential battleground of Ohio.
"He said that I* said we should take Detroit bankrupt*," Romney said. "*And that's right. My plan was to have the company go through bankruptcy* like 7-Eleven did and Macy's and Continental Airlines and come out stronger."
The end result? When he had a chance to mitigate the damage, Romney instead reminded millions of viewers that he would have let the auto industry go under without government help. As the saying goes: When you're explaining, you're losing.

*IBD/TIPP 2012 Presidential Election Daily Tracking Poll*: Oct. 17, 2012 Obama is up +1.5
Obama 46.8% | Romney 45.3%


Read More At IBD 

ABC News/Wash Post has Obama up too.

A new POLITICO/George Washington University Battleground Poll of likely voters puts Obama ahead of Romney 49 percent to 48 percent, a statistical tie and the same as the week before. Across the 10 states identified by POLITICO as competitive, Romney leads 50 percent to 48 percent.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA not knowing what a neo-con is.

Shocker.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

Coming from the other side of the pond I always find US elections utterly fascinating, it really is a pantomime. All the televised debates, the big flashy campaigns, the rallies... over here there's none of the mass celebrations etc. it's more a case of "oh good job mate, now hurry up and fix the fucking country before we change our minds."
And there's the focusing of attention on 2 individuals rather than whole parties, the main (only) 2 of which really aren't that different. It's compelling.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

9QA, have you ever had an original thought?


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Fucking sheeps. The government got you guys programmed.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

You_heard? said:


> Fucking sheeps. The government got you guys programmed.


I HATE THE ANTI government !! most of you that subscribe to ANTI government get on government roads to go to work and some of you are on food stamps or Section 8.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

9QA said:


> I HATE THE ANTI government !! most of you that subscribe to ANTI government get on government roads to go to work and some of you are on food stamps.


This is how the government sees you:


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Im not on food stamps, im rich

fuck the poor

also, im privately educated


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

What country you from?


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> Fucking sheeps. The government got you guys programmed.


The reason the majority of the population don't buy into conspiracy stuff is because most people who promote it are incredibly rude, like your good self.

And it's 'sheep', there's no such thing as 'sheeps' (inb4 "yes there is, YOU!")


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

You_heard? said:


> What country you from?


Idontgiveafuckstan

its next on the US invasion list


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Romney vs. Obama - this is a poll from today


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> The reason the majority of the population don't buy into conspiracy stuff is because most people who promote it are incredibly rude, like your good self.
> 
> And it's 'sheep', there's no such thing as 'sheeps' (inb4 "yes there is, YOU!")


Excuses. Don't take my word for it, the evidence it's in plain sight.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

he's from Amexistan like myself and rawlin


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Lennon said:


> The reason the majority of the population don't buy into conspiracy stuff is because most people who promote it are incredibly rude, like your good self.
> 
> And it's 'sheep', there's no such thing as 'sheeps' (inb4 "yes there is, YOU!")


The reason most people don't buy into conspiracies is because 99.9% of it is crap.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Striker said:


> The reason most people don't buy into conspiracies is because 99.9% of it is crap.


How about the poison in our food and water? How about the Chemtrails? etc.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> Excuses. Don't take my word for it, the evidence it's in plain sight.


See, at no point did I state whether I'm into it or not, so thank you for proving my point! Besides, whether there's dodgy stuff going on or not, exactly what do you think you, or anyone else can do about it? Not a damn thing. So take of your tinfoil helmet off, get out of the bunker and go enjoy life while you can dammit!


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> How about the poison in our food and water? How about the Chemtrails? etc.


And what do these things achieve for the government, or whoever may be in charge exactly? I'm genuinely curious btw


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> See, at no point did I state whether I'm into it or not, so thank you for proving my point! Besides, whether there's dodgy stuff going on or not, exactly what do you think you, or anyone else can do about it? Not a damn thing. So take of your tinfoil helmet off, get out of the bunker and go enjoy life while you can dammit!


This is why America is fucked. People like you think we can't do anything about it. Don't you know we outnumber the Government? Keep up on eating your tainted food bro.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> And what do these things achieve for the government, or whoever may be in charge exactly? I'm genuinely curious btw


They want to dumb down the masses so that we can be easy manipulative. With a dumbed down society they can carry out their plans to have a New World Order.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> This is why America is fucked. People like you think we can't do anything about it. Don't you know we outnumber the Government? Keep up on eating your tainted food bro.


1) I'm from Scotland.
2) I have a theory of my own - do you never wonder why this super powerful, all-seeing evil cabal which runs the world don't remove all the "truth" videos from Youtube, the most popular and easily accessible video site on the internet? Perhaps because it's convenient for them if people spend all their time worrying about outlandish theories about poisoning the air and mind control, which distracts them from the actual political bullshittery which is going on? 
3) I highly doubt big Ali from the indian takeaway is poisoning my chicken korma. Although I did get the shits after a kebab one night, you could be on to something...


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

You_heard? said:


> How about the poison in our food and water? How about the Chemtrails? etc.


Those aren't conspiracy theories.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> 1) I'm from Scotland.
> 2) I have a theory of my own - do you never wonder why this super powerful, all-seeing evil cabal which runs the world don't remove all the "truth" videos from Youtube, the most popular and easily accessible video site on the internet? Perhaps because it's convenient for them if people spend all their time worrying about outlandish theories about poisoning the air and mind control, which distracts them from the actual political bullshittery which is going on?
> 3) I highly doubt big Ali from the indian takeaway is poisoning my chicken korma. Although I did get the shits after a kebab one night, you could be on to something...


The reason why they don't remove the truth videos because that would make it obvious. It's reverse psychology bro. They know you'll think that so they leave it there. Like I said the evidence it's in plain sight.



Striker said:


> Those aren't conspiracy theories.


I know, their fact.


----------



## Wayne Rooney's Fellatio Slave (Sep 6, 2012)

Where's the mister potato head option? He'd be better than both of these mongs


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> The reason why they don't remove the truth videos because that would make it obvious. It's reverse psychology bro. They know you'll think that so they leave it there. Like I said the evidence it's in plain sight.


Many of these videos have millions of views, if I was an evil megalomaniac I would want that shit taken down ASAP. And I'm guessing you heard all the stuff about the London Olympics? Not a damn thing happened there, I suppose that was reverse psychology too?

Now stuff like the JFK assassination, manipulating events leading up to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, any idiot could see something is wrong there, but it's all politically motivated. There's a difference. We've been hearing about the NWO for years, yet nothing has ever happened. Has your life ever been affected in any way by this supposed evil cabal? I know mine hasn't.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> Many of these videos have millions of views, if I was an evil megalomaniac I would want that shit taken down ASAP. And I'm guessing you heard all the stuff about the London Olympics? Not a damn thing happened there, I suppose that was reverse psychology too?
> 
> Now stuff like the JFK assassination, manipulating events leading up to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, any idiot could see something is wrong there, but it's all politically motivated. There's a difference. We've been hearing about the NWO for years, yet nothing has ever happened. Has your life ever been affected in any way by this supposed evil cabal? I know mine hasn't.


THEY DON'T REMOVE THE VIDEOS BECAUSE THAT WILL MAKE IT OBVIOUS THAT THEY EXIST! You sir, are pretty ignorant. I haven't heard anything about the london olympics. I just research the facts. And you said nothing happened? Who do you think attacked the twin towers?


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

You_heard? said:


> They want to dumb down the masses so that we can be easy manipulative. With a dumbed down society they can carry out their plans to have a New World Order.


Someone listens to much alex jones.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> THEY DON'T REMOVE THE VIDEOS BECAUSE THAT WILL MAKE IT OBVIOUS THAT THEY EXIST! You sir, are pretty ignorant. I haven't heard anything about the london olympics. I just research the facts. And you said nothing happened? Who do you think attacked the twin towers?


I love how you completely ignored the second half of my post, and you never heard about one of the most talked about "conspiracies" since 9/11, yet you call me ignorant. Allow me to repeat myself - 

"Now stuff like the JFK assassination, manipulating events leading up to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, any idiot could see something is wrong there, but it's all politically motivated. There's a difference. We've been hearing about the NWO for years, yet nothing has ever happened. Has your life ever been affected in any way by this supposed evil cabal? I know mine hasn't."

The Iraq and Afghanistan bit includes 9/11, in case you didn't work that out.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

ignorant.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> ignorant.


Is that it? Oh you're good :lmao


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

I have nothing to say. I'm getting a headache now. I bet you brush your teeth with fluoridated toothpaste.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

You're nuts man!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA said:


> I HATE THE ANTI government !! most of you that subscribe to ANTI government get on government roads to go to work and some of you are on food stamps or Section 8.


fpalm Oh good lord you poor brainwashed fool. There are services the government should provide. Roads and food stamps qualify. Strangling the would-be free market economy with regulations that support outsourcing big corporations and wreck small American businesses (costing us countless jobs) does not. Controlling the medical industry does not. Controlling MARRIAGE does not. Controlling which substances we can CHOOSE to put in our OWN bodies does not. 

Just because you support an economically unsustainable nanny state that makes all your decisions for you doesn't mean people who aren't afraid of using their brains have to.

"Oh but you use the roads so you have to support everything the government does!" Unbelievable.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

No i'm not. I'm stating facts here.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> I have nothing to say. I'm getting a headache now. I bet you brush your teeth with fluoridated toothpaste.


Brilliant :lmao

I can see you have nothing to say. That kids, is the sound of someone losing a debate. Much like Mr Romney, aaaaand we're back on topic! We've come full circle, beautiful


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Says the guy who trust the US government that put poison in our food, water, and skies. Yeah, I lost all right :kobe


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> Says the guy who trust the US government that put poison in our food, water, and skies. Yeah, I lost all right :kobe


You're just making stuff up now man, I wouldn't trust the US government to tie their own shoelaces never mind run the world. But for different reasons, y'know, ones which actually exist.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

What in the world you're talking about?


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> What in the world you're talking about?


Oh never mind, you're clearly on a massive fluoride trip. Me and the 'nati boys are off to sacrifice baby goats and plant hidden satanic messages on Pornhub, later bro.


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

I never said the illuminati exist. I'm just stating the facts about what the US Government is currently doing to us. Now answer my question.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> Romney vs. Obama - this is a poll from today


That's a poll from Connecticut you fool, one of the most Liberal states in the union. Are you hoping people wouldn't notice that and declare Obama the GOAT?

Christ.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Obama is the favorite and will win the election, not sure what posting polls over and over again is going to prove. Is anyone saying Obama will lose?  Is anyone who is actively posting in this thread even supporting Romney?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

He needs to prove us NEO-CONS wrong, CP.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

You_heard? said:


> I never said the illuminati exist. I'm just stating the facts about what the US Government is currently doing to us. Now answer my question.


If you're referring to my last post on the previous page, what I meant was that I certainly don't trust the US goverment, but not because they're shitting in people's toothpaste or whatever it is you lot believe, but because they sent thousands of young men out to the middle east to be slaughtered, for various reasons, none of which were to "spread democracy" or find "WMD's" (that was a laugh eh?). Iraq's close proximity to Iran and Israel may also have helped, just a tiny wee bit...
And I don't need to tell you about the Kennedy assassination I'm sure. My point is, you should look a bit closer to home before worrying about crazy global conspiracies. You're missing political issues which are right under your nose, and which might actually affect you.


----------



## Lennon (Jan 20, 2010)

Anyway kinda back on topic for the 2nd time (sorry guys), does nobody else find it bizarre that the American political system consists of a choice between centre right and extreme right? Yet they're portrayed as being complete opposites. Any other ideologies are shot down in flames immediately, it just couldn't happen. The Republicans scare people by comparing the Democrats to "European socialists" when they're not even close, they are more conservative than the actual conservative party in the UK! Yet their centre right position is as far to the left as Americans are willing to go. Strange.

And don't even get me started on healthcare. The fact that it's even an issue is fucked up to me, completely and utterly baffling. Perhaps our cultures are more different than they appear...


----------



## The One (Jul 16, 2012)

Lennon said:


> If you're referring to my last post on the previous page, what I meant was that I certainly don't trust the US goverment, but not because they're shitting in people's toothpaste or whatever it is you lot believe, but because they sent thousands of young men out to the middle east to be slaughtered, for various reasons, none of which were to "spread democracy" or find "WMD's" (that was a laugh eh?). Iraq's close proximity to Iran and Israel may also have helped, just a tiny wee bit...
> And I don't need to tell you about the Kennedy assassination I'm sure. My point is, you should look a bit closer to home before worrying about crazy global conspiracies. You're missing political issues which are right under your nose, and which might actually affect you.


Great post. I can't argue with that one.


----------



## Hajduk1911 (Mar 12, 2010)

I will probably vote Gary Johnson, in fact I haven't voted for a "R" or a "D" in any national or local election since 2008


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)




----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

> Four years ago, President Obama promised a deficit cut in half and unemployment drastically reduced. He had a House and Senate of his own party and stated that if he couldn’t get the job done in four years, he didn’t deserve to be re-elected.
> In the last four years, our national debt has increased to more than $16 trillion. Unemployment is over 8 percent for 43 straight months, and approximately 8 percent of U.S. citizens are getting welfare benefits, including food stamps. The bailed-out auto industry still has to pay taxpayers back. Food, fuel and gasoline costs are at record highs, along with the overall cost of living.
> The American taxpayers are being squeezed to empty. Almost half of the citizens don’t even pay federal income taxes, further burdening the other half. Small businesses are closing up or struggling mightily to survive. The national health care mess still isn’t explaining where the money is coming from to pay for it. The Congressional Budget Office projects a national debt of more than $20 trillion during the course of another four years of President Obama.
> While this is happening, Obama has used his local and national speaking opportunities to make fluff speeches with no true substance, to throw blame away from himself, which is where it belongs. Four years ago, he promised hope and change, but has only delivered pandering and blame. The time has come to send President Obama back to community organizing before our economy slumps to its worse debt in history.
> Remember, he himself stated he doesn’t deserve to be re-elected if he fails. The numbers and facts are not lying. President Obama has failed the people of this country.


And just to confirm what someone else said earlier:


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

actually obamacare will help lower the deficit

but allowing the homeless to die? that will ERASE the deficit


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

That's true it would lower it. But the question is that, how exactly are going to pay for it? Through taxes? We already are paying out the ass for things like ssi and state funded medicare. I'm sure Romneycare is going to be no different. That's why me like alot of others wanted Ron Paul over Romney.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

9QA said:


> Romney vs. Obama - this is a poll from today


Holy shit. :lmao


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Mystical, by your logic, everyone police officer should have full riot gear on at every WWE because hundreds of people are going to, OMG RIOT IF CM PUNK LOSES.

EDIT:
And way to post the most some of the most idiotic people on FB.

Dickslapyomomma? Really?


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

We need to bring the seriousness down for a minute.






:lmao


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Abraham Lincoln won.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mystical said:


> And just to confirm what someone else said earlier:


People aren't going to riot. Don't listen to what the person said earlier. People say all sorts of dumb stuff on Twitter and Facebook.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Abe always wins.

I want to hear more from magicians. If an actual wizard would weigh in, that'd be amazing.

Seriously though, remember to NOT insult people ITT even you really feel you have to. REFRAIN.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Romney up 52-45 in the latest Gallup poll. I don't put much stock into polls, but it seems 9QA does. Is he on suicide watch right now?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

A Romney victory would be disastrous for the cause of Liberty. Romney and Obama are both Statists who want to take away our liberties and continue this never-ending state of war. The only difference is a President Romney would prevent a Liberty-minded Republican from running in 2016 and SAVING AMERICA AS WE KNOW IT.

In fact, I'd say this is really the only significant difference between the two candidates.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Guys, it's all about who will appoint what type of douchebag to the Supreme Court. Give me whoever Obama appoints over whoever Romney appoints. The balance could be catastrophically thrown off. LIBERTY is at stake here.

The Supreme Court appointments are talked about, but never enough.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I think we know what 9QA would have done. :bron2


----------



## WrestlingFan 171 (Oct 18, 2012)

Romney need to win so the US doesnt die

Either way taxes dont matter to me I get screwed anyways

these debates are pretty fun to watch


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The Onion reporting, "Nation Tunes In To See Which Sociopath More Likable This Time". 

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-tunes-in-to-see-which-sociopath-more-likabl,29946/

Here I thought The Onion was supposed to be parody. :hmm:


----------



## DBizzle (Mar 14, 2010)

Not voting for Mittens. The republican party is the biggest threat to "average" Americans in recent history. Yet, they have somehow convinced the voters that they care. The repubs have become a horrid mix of: 
-- uber-rich people who get all sorts of government aid and loopholes (yet hypocritically bitch about welfare)
-- ultra religious freaks (who say they are losing their religious freedom - lol - just because you are christian doesn't mean you get to legislate morality - we are NOT a theocracy)
-- birthers
-- tea partiers - "Get your government hands off my medicare!" - need I say more - people who claim they want a constitutional government and they can't spell constitution 
-- war mongers - see chicken hawks like Dick Cheney 

Conservatives have been on the wrong side of history on nearly every major issue. They are hypocrites. I can sum up their economic policy in a few words "I got mine. Screw you.". Conservatives are the type of folks who want to make the rules and then not have to follow them. Job creators who send the jobs over seas, "Moral" congressman who have secret gay affairs and claim that the devil made them do it, people who deny science (e.g. people who support abstinence only education.), and people who try and sell revisionist history to Americans too lazy to research it on their own. You want hypocritical morons in charge, the right wing has plenty. 

America needs a real Progressive candidate to come along and our county needs to undergo some type of enlightenment age or we are in real trouble ...


----------



## Until May (Feb 5, 2011)

[email protected] voting for romney, please


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

lol @ voting for Obama or Romney, please.


----------



## Ether (Aug 28, 2012)




----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Republican party needs to be changed for sure. Thankfully we have the liberty movement which is on its way of doing just that. Need neo-con ROMNEY to job first though.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

With Romney at 52% in the Gallup Poll, he is ahead of:

Where Jimmy Carter was in 1976 (47%)
Where Ronald Reagan was in 1980 (39% -- Carter was six points up)
Where George H.W. Bush was in 1988 (50%)
Where Bill Clinton was in 1992 (40%)
Where George W. Bush was in 2000 (48%)
Where Barack Obama was in 2008 (49%)

Looks like we might have to get used to saying "President Romney".


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I desperately hope not, brother GOON.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Same, Brother Camille. I already have a plane ticket booked to Argentina, where I will move to and herd cattle for the next eight years. At least if Obama wins we have RAND PAUL to fall back on in 2016.


----------



## Freeloader (Jul 27, 2011)

This should be a fun post to dismantle. Not like it takes much effort with 20 something people on a wrestling forum anyhow. Let's see here...



DBizzle said:


> Not voting for Mittens. The republican party is the biggest threat to "average" Americans in recent history. Yet, they have somehow convinced the voters that they care.


They don't care because they don't want people _dependent_ on government? Oh ok. 



> The repubs have become a horrid mix of:
> -- uber-rich people who get all sorts of government aid and loopholes


So the democrats aren't rich? And the democrats don't *exclude themselves from things? Is this a joke?




tea partiers - "Get your government hands off my medicare!" - need I say more - people who claim they want a constitutional government and they can't spell constitution

Click to expand...

Hey quick - Can you inform me of the number of arrests, terrorist plots, drugs traded, and assaults/rapes that took place between events at Tea Parties, and events at various "Occupy" events? You know - Occupy Wall Street, a very liberal movement that spread across the country and saw countless drugs traded, children "misplaced" and even idiots trying to blow up a bridge? Hop to it, Sparky, and get me those figures. Thanks.




-- war mongers - see chicken hawks like Dick Cheney

Click to expand...

War mongers -- Hey did JFK ad LBJ escalate action in Vietnam? Did Obama claim he was closing Guantanamo Bay, and then not do it? Did he also ok action in Libya? Both parties are "hawks" when it suits them. You're post has been bullshit til now, but this one is the biggest bullshit by far. Youre one sided comments are fucking laughable.




Conservatives have been on the wrong side of history on nearly every major issue.

Click to expand...

-Ending slavery
-Low Taxes

Shit I can stop right there and I've already crushed your comment above. 





They are hypocrites. I can sum up their economic policy in a few words "I got mine. Screw you.".

Click to expand...

I work two jobs, so I don't "got mine" and yet I still support a Conservative mindset over a race baiting, pro entitlement one. Entitlement programs leads to learned helplessness. Seen how fucked up California is with multiple cities filing for bankruptcy? Probably not, too busy "being trendy" as a liberal. Fun fact: California has colleges that require no history or political classes to graduate, but taking a Marvel Comics class earns the same level of credit. Yeah - cause that's totally the same thing!




Americans too lazy to research it on their own. You want hypocritical morons in charge, the right wing has plenty.

Click to expand...

:durant2

LAUGH OUT FUCKING LOUD @ THE UNDERLINE*


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Quality post, and ironic name Freeloader. 

I'm not sure when "caring" meant "making people dependent on the government". About the same time the lines blurred between charity and theft I reckon.

People who think Obama is any less pro-war than Romney, or hell even Dick Cheney, are absolutely deluded. He wanted to keep 10,000 US troops in Iraq past the deadline agreed to by George W Bush. There's also the continued drone strikes in Libya and Pakistan. Many innocent civilians are killed in these attacks. But it's not a war, 'cause AMERICANS aren't dying. Meanwhile 4 Americans are killed in Libya and Obama is MAD. And it's a wonder terrorist groups have no problem recruiting.


----------



## Freeloader (Jul 27, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> That's a poll from Connecticut you fool, one of the most Liberal states in the union. Are you hoping people wouldn't notice that and declare Obama the GOAT?
> 
> Christ.


Heh. New England as a whole is one of the most liberal (and most atheist) locations in the entire country. Only New Hampshire keeps it from being a liberal sweep in all six states, and their conservative leanings are starting to turn slightly Libertarian (so is Maine) in some areas. Ron Paul resonated with some people there, and even moreso in Maine.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

*THE PEACE CANDIDATE~!*


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Looks like :gus there.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

9QA must be cutting himself after seeing those Gallup #'s, no presidential candidate has lost after reaching 50% in a Gallup poll this close to the election.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Would be very frustrated by a Romney victory. Ughhhh.

And before anyone tells me to vote Obama (an awful thing to say to anyone, btw), I live in California, a firmly blue state.


----------



## Freeloader (Jul 27, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Quality post, and ironic name Freeloader.
> 
> People who think Obama is any less pro-war than Romney, or hell even Dick Cheney, are absolutely deluded. He wanted to keep 10,000 US troops in Iraq past the deadline agreed to by George W Bush. There's also the continued drone strikes in Libya and Pakistan. Many innocent civilians are killed in these attacks. But it's not a war, 'cause AMERICANS aren't dying. Meanwhile 4 Americans are killed in Libya and Obama is MAD. And it's a wonder terrorist groups have no problem recruiting.


Yeah the only area I would separate Obama and Romney is when it comes to how much action to take in regards to Iran and backing Israel. Romney thinks we need to give Israel anything they want, and Obama is more reluctant to offer them aid. Personally, I think the entire Middle East is a joke and much of our policy there (directed by both Republicans AND Democrats) is a dated, tainted and overall deplorable policy. Money going to Pakistan is the fucking worst. 

Romney and Obama are not terribly different IMO. They talk about their differences in debates, but it's not like we're talking George Bush vs John Kerry here, or Theodore Roosevelt vs Woodrow Wilson.


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Look we gave your country a pass when you voted in Bush. Sure we ridiculed you as a nation but that was your free pass. If you guys vote in Romney you have no world credibility anymore and at that point China should swoop in and ownn you cause the idea of intelligent voting is going whoooosh over some peoples heads.

* knowing I'll probably get in trouble for this post cause someone on here will have no sense of humour


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

We all knew it was coming. More to come.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Saul GOONman said:


> lol @ voting for Obama or Romney, please.


lol at voting for someone who doesn't stand a chance.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

It's funny Obama is celebrated for not being George W Bush considering how EXACTLY THE SAME, IF NOT MORE AGGRESSIVE he is to George W Bush when it comes to foreign policy. fpalm

Please people from other countries, tell us more about how Obama is better for the world. Specifics would be nice.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Gallup poll is ran by right wing neocons.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Thank God he's nothing like Bush was. 

Highlights, Obama has:

Tripled the number of troops in Afghanistan 
Has initiated drone attacks (these kill civilians btw) in Yemen, Somalia, and Libya
Supports the Patriot act
Guantanamo Bay is still open 
The TSA is completely unchecked

Hurray for anti-war/pro-liberty Obama!


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

Obama will most likely win Ohio and no Republican candidate within the past 50 or so years has won the presidential election without Ohio. That being said, Romney may not take Ohio but could take Wisconsin, Nevada, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina and Virginia and still win. 

With the Gallup Poll, it doesn't set in stone a Romney victory either.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

im still voting for Obama b/c i've settled for the lesser. i respect brothers CP and GOON for their effors in this thread though.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

And I can respect you voting for the lesser evil, scrilla. Here's hoping in 2016 we have a candidate we can feel good about voting for.

That said, there are still victories for liberty to be won in congress.


----------



## Mikey Damage (Jul 11, 2004)

President Obama.

Mittens is a just liar. President Obama has his faults, but I feel he's got a solid grasp of what is realistic and what is not.

Romney does not.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Neither of them has a grasp on what is realistic at all, unfortunately. They think government spending is going to create jobs and fix the economy. It doesn't work like that.


----------



## Mikey Damage (Jul 11, 2004)

Obama is trying to cut Gov't spending, though.

Trying is the keyword, however. Not exactly being successful with it.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Neither of them has a grasp on what is realistic at all, unfortunately. They think government spending is going to create jobs and fix the economy. It doesn't work like that.


It doesn't work the other way either though does it?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## GothicBohemian (May 26, 2012)

charmed1 said:


> Look we gave your country a pass when you voted in Bush. Sure we ridiculed you as a nation but that was your free pass. If you guys vote in Romney you have no world credibility anymore and at that point China should swoop in and ownn you cause the idea of intelligent voting is going whoooosh over some peoples heads.
> 
> * knowing I'll probably get in trouble for this post cause someone on here will have no sense of humour


Umm, the conservatives are in power here despite only 40% of the country voting for them, we`ve had the robocall election scandal, the recent dropping of all but one non-Christian clergy from the prison system...we up north can`t point fingers right now. :no:


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

Mikey Damage said:


> Obama is trying to cut Gov't spending, though.
> 
> Trying is the keyword, however. Not exactly being successful with it.


expecting a democrat to cut spending is like expecting a republican to tax the wealthiest 1%. It wont happen.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Karma101 said:


> It doesn't work the other way either though does it?


Of course it does, and has. The Keynesian model has NEVER worked. The problem with the economy is government involvement. A true free market economy works it's own issues out, government "solutions" just make things worse, giving unfair advantages to big corporations who've bought and paid for the government regulators who are supposed to "fix" everything. *Think about it: truly intelligent money-minded folk aren't working dayjobs for the fucking GOVERNMENT. They're in the private sector making millions or billions of dollars. The government regulators are the less intelligent economists who are easily outmaneuvered and manipulated by their much smarter private sector counterparts. *

The government is corrupt and incompetent. It doesn't make anything better, in fact it makes things significantly worse. Always has. American capitalists are too smart, which is why they've bought and paid for these elected officials before they've even entered office.

As for Obama cutting spending, no he isn't. He's going to spend trillions more on his socialist programs which make more and more Americans completely dependent on the government. Romney isn't any better though, all the money he'd cut from welfare programs would go to the fucking MILITARY. He wants to spend more than the current DEFICIT on "defense" alone. 

They're both completely unrealistic and illogical.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

I'm for Obama and my girlfriend is for Romney. 
We try not to even come close to bringing up politics, but I showed her my new Obama shirt and we went back and forth. :lmao:lmao
Oh joy! :StephenA


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

GothicBohemian said:


> Umm, the conservatives are in power here despite only 40% of the country voting for them, we`ve had the robocall election scandal, the recent dropping of all but one non-Christian clergy from the prison system...we up north can`t point fingers right now. :no:


No one is less of a fan of Harper than me. But to be fair it looks like we have another Trudeau prime ministry coming up.(yep I am calling this one early)

What baffles me is that theres a large portion of the United States that look at a guy blatantly lie to them and say "yeah that sounds like a great guy to vote for."

I hate to play this card, and I say it with much reluctance, but even a die-hard conservative has to have problems with the insane platform that Romney/Ryan run under and it brings into play the thoughts of race issues.

Obviously after the Bush debacle the US needed spin doctoring badly. Obama was the great face for that. Now they are getting ready, it seems, to elect someone who has less of a clue than Bush and his Vice-President nominee is even worse.

Here in Canada we voted in Harper again, which although idiotic is completely the fault of the other parties for having extremely weak candidates in the running.( I wasn't one of the "we" that voted him in, I helped out with the NDP campaign)

I've yet to read a good legitimate reason to vote in an extremist like Romney and I am baffled that so many people are just willing to throw there votes away on candidates that have little to no chance. Voting is something a lot of good men fought and died for and to see it wasted like this is disheartening.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

charmed1 said:


> I've yet to read a good legitimate reason to vote in an extremist like Romney and I am baffled that so many people are just willing to throw there votes away on candidates that have little to no chance. Voting is something a lot of good men fought and died for and to see it wasted like this is disheartening.


There are no legitimate reasons to vote for either Obama or Romney. They're basically the exact same candidate, with the only real difference being that Romney is a Mormon and Obama is a Christian. 

I'd rather vote for someone who has little chance of winning than sell my soul to the two party machine by voting for one of their hand-picked candidates. 

A vote for a third party isn't being wasted. Hell, the Founding Fathers warned against a two-party system, but yet here we are. They fought for the right to vote for whoever you want; not for the right to vote for only one of the two parties.

EDIT- Plus, Romney isn't an extremist. He represents the norm in modern day American politics, as does Obama. Hardly an extremist.


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Saul GOONman said:


> There are no legitimate reasons to vote for either Obama or Romney. They're basically the exact same candidate, with the only real difference being that Romney is a Mormon and Obama is a Christian.
> 
> I'd rather vote for someone who has little chance of winning than sell my soul to the two party machine by voting for one of their hand-picked candidates.
> 
> A vote for a third party isn't being wasted. Hell, the Founding Fathers warned against a two-party system, but yet here we are. They fought for the right to vote for whoever you want; not for the right to vote for only one of the two parties.


I completely agree with your thoughts on the two party system but at a time when that is sadly the case and you have the chance that someone like Romney can get in, its hard to take that leap of faith that he won't.

Not saying that Obama is the greatest but he has done a lot for your country and some of the stuff he couldn't do was because it was blocked by the Republican party. here's a party that would rather sabotage your country to get into office than work together to make your nation stronger.

Speaking from outside of the US. I am Canadian and most of my friends are from different countries, Morocco, Portugal, etc the US is no longer seen by outsiders as the super power that it once was. I'm your neighbour over here and I'd love to see the United States come back to its glory days of yesteryear but the decisions being made is shifting you guys farther down.

Just giving an international perspective here not meant as a personal affront in any way


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

charmed1 said:


> Not saying that Obama is the greatest but he has done a lot for your country and some of the stuff he couldn't do was because it was blocked by the Republican party. here's a party that would rather sabotage your country to get into office than work together to make your nation stronger.


Yes, he's made us more dependent on horribly mismanaged government programs all on the tax payer's dollar (charity isn't reaching into someone else's pocket and giving it to the poor, that's called THEFT), raised healthcare costs, got us into multiple new foreign wars and is considering more, tripled our number of troops in Afghanistan, bailed out big businesses, continues to create more and more foreign enemies via funding civil wars abroad and ordering continuous DRONE STRIKES which kill innocent civilians in other countries. People thought George W Bush made everyone hate us? LOL. Obama does all the same shit and then some. Why do people ignore this fact? 

He's done a lot. If only any of it was good for us.


----------



## Oakue (Jul 16, 2012)

There is beginning to emerge the very real possibility Obama is re-elected based on the Electoral College but loses the poplar vote.

The national polls are for Romney, while the swing state polls are for Obama. 

So, Republicans will be infuriated but the worst possible thing they could ever do in a moment of anger is try to repeal the electoral college. They will doom themselves tremendously if they did that.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The Republican party needs to lose this election. They need to see a neo-con version of Obama isn't going to get the job done. They need to get behind the liberty-minded Rand Paul in 2016. If Romney wins then I fear our sharply partisan way of thinking will cause Republicans to think everything is great even though Romney is doing all the same shit Obama did, and the liberty movement's momentum will be slowed.


----------



## Oakue (Jul 16, 2012)

By the way Jeb Bush said he thinks Texas could be blue by 2016. I think that's a tad too early, but Republicans are really in for an uphill battle if they lose the strangle hold on Texas in future elections.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I was hoping that Romney would get obliterated in the hopes that the GOP would see that Neo-Conservatism is killing the party, but now it looks like Romney might just win this thing, so that hope is out of the question.

Romney being close isn't due to be people liking Romney tbh. It's due to the fact that Obama is p. awful, and people are realizing that. Damn shame they didn't see the same thing with Romney during the primaries.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The Republican party botched the primaries so hard. So close to getting a guy in there who knows what the fuck is going on and isn't afraid of following the truth. Instead they went with the delusional neo-con. Yay.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> The Republican party botched the primaries so hard. So close to getting a guy in there who knows what the fuck is going on and isn't afraid of following the truth. Instead they went with the delusional neo-con. Yay.


In retrospect, Ron never had a chance. The media (especially FOX) ignored him, and was ignored during the debates as well. Luckily, it seems that RAND is getting some love from the GOP establishment, and the NEO-CONS seem to like him as well, and see him as the "sane" Paul family member, yet him and Ron basically have the same views. Just goes to show how many sheep there are, and how much the media really matters in this nation. They'll go with whatever the media tells them.

I've always wondered how people could like Rand but not Ron, but then I realized the GOP establishment doesn't absolutely hate Rand. He has a fighting chance in 2016, especially if all of Ron's support the past two elections go towards him.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

What happens if Romney wins?

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/larison/what-happens-if-romney-wins/

Darwin help us.


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

They go with who ever will save them the most money. Millionaires know Romney will give them huge tax breaks if he gets into office, if I was rich I would vote for him too. lol



Also, sorry to shit all over your hopes GOON. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtO5INu-VY4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqH6m8KgJkM


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Striketeam said:


> Also, sorry to shit all over your hopes GOON.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtO5INu-VY4
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MqH6m8KgJkM


You can't change the Republican party if you're on the outs with the Republican party. Endorse Romney now, get Republican support when you run for president later. His voting record is perfect and until that changes I'm not going to be concerned by his political strategy.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I don't care if Rand is a prick. Have you seen his voting record?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

In case anyone is interesting in hearing about the country's issues outside the established narratives by Democrats, Republicans, and biased news sources, the third party presidential candidates are holding a debate this Tuesday. Obviously none of the candidates can or will win the election, but that's not really the point. It'll also be moderated by Larry King, which is pretty sweet. 

http://freeandequal.org/updates/larry-king-to-moderate-third-party-presidential-debate/


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Obama (D)	Romney (R)	Spread
RCP Average	10/7 - 10/18	--	--	47.1	47.0	Obama +0.1
Rasmussen Tracking	10/16 - 10/18	1500 LV	3.0	48	48	Tie
IBD/TIPP Tracking	10/13 - 10/18	909 LV	3.5	47	45	Obama +2
Gallup Tracking	10/12 - 10/18	2700 LV	2.0	45	51	Romney +6
Hartford Courant/UConn	10/11 - 10/16	1023 LV	3.0	48	45	Obama +3
ABC News/Wash Post	10/10 - 10/13	923 LV	3.5	49	46	Obama +3
Politico/GWU/Battleground	10/7 - 10/11	1000 LV	3.1	49	48	Obama +1
Monmouth/SurveyUSA/Braun	10/8 - 10/10	1360 LV	2.7	46	47	Romney +1
FOX News	10/7 - 10/9	1109 LV	3.0	45	46	Romney 
+1

Obama is wining in all the polls.

http://cnn.com/video/?/video/politics/2012/10/19/exp-tsr-king-florida-poll.cnn

(CNN) - Three days before the final presidential debate, a new survey in the biggest of the battleground states indicates the race for the White House is basically tied.

According to a CNN/ORC International poll conducted Wednesday and Thursday, entirely after the second presidential debate, 49% of likely voters in Florida say they support Republican nominee Mitt Romney, with 48% backing President Barack Obama. Romney's one point margin is well within the survey's sampling error.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> Poll	Date	Sample	MoE	Obama (D)	Romney (R)	Spread
> RCP Average	10/7 - 10/18	--	--	47.1	47.0	Obama +0.1
> *Rasmussen Tracking	10/16 - 10/18	1500 LV	3.0	48	48	Tie*
> IBD/TIPP Tracking	10/13 - 10/18	909 LV	3.5	47	45	Obama +2
> ...


He's not winning in those two. Nice job.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

typical voter, cant even read


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA, what do you like about Obama?


----------



## Stax Classic (May 27, 2010)

I just mailed in my vote, that's one vote that black ain't getting.


----------



## Ether (Aug 28, 2012)

Saul GOONman said:


> He's not winning in those two. Nice job.


:lmao


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

These national polls mean absolutely shit. It's a real conspiracy that we didn't get any good canidates this year, Ron Paul should have won.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

If Obama loses this election, it'll be because of this horrible, and I do mean horrible, campaign that he has run. 

This should have been an easy re-election year for him, but it seems like every day some new gaff is happening or some new mishap is taking place either through him or someone in his campaign. It is downright remarkable how badly this campaign has been handled from the poor debate performance, to the gaffs from Longoria & Biden, to the mishandling of the Libya situation. 

I don't like Romney or Obama, but I am just stunned by what I am seeing from the President. This might be the worst campaign run from an incumbent President that I have ever seen.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

cant be any worse than romney. the 47% remarks and binders full of women hardly did him any favours


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

The saddest thing is, Obama's 2008 campaign was GOAT. If the GOP put up a candidate that people actually somewhat liked, this election would be all but over by now.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

meh, i coulda run in 2008 and won

bush fucked the GOP beyond imagination at that point


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

double post


----------



## dakota5369 (Oct 20, 2012)

vote for me, obama! i wont tell you i have done anything worth a crap in 4 years, but romney hates women and he is rich! you gonna stand for that?


----------



## Genking48 (Feb 3, 2009)

Why do Romney want to be president of this country? seems like he doesn't like half of the population.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

If Romney becomes president, which of his wives will appear in public with him?


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Karma101 said:


> If Romney becomes president, which of his wives will appear in public with him?


He could start a new trend. _Here comes the president and the first lady, second lady, third lady,..._


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

It ain't even the bad debate at this point. The attempted spin of the Bengahzi situation was awful. It just makes everyone look like incompetent douchebags.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

MrMister said:


> It ain't even the bad debate at this point. The attempted spin of the Bengahzi situation was awful. It just makes everyone look like incompetent douchebags.


I'd wish they'd get off that Benghazi crap too. Nothing to gain from exploiting that. 

That being said, the issue of marriage eqaulity should be brought up at the next debate. I think it would throw both candidates off.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Marriage and government need to get a divorce.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Are you an anarchist CP?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Not at all. I just don't think marriage needs to be a government affair.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

I didn't ask just because of that statement. You seem to hold the government in high contempt, and with good reason of course.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The federal government oversteps its bounds and tries to control things that 1) it has no business being involved with and/or 2) the STATES should decide for themselves individually.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Brother Camille and I are merely fans of LIBERTY and PERSONAL FREEDOM, something the federal government hasn't done too good of a job of defending for quite a while.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

The federal government gives certain benefits to married people. All people should be able to get these benefits. I agree the federal government oversteps its bounds all too often, but it's not doing that in this instance, assuming the Supreme Court ever weighs in of course.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The woman I love second only to Mila Kunis says it best.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

She's kinda nutty. I like her. You saw her first though.


----------



## Freeloader (Jul 27, 2011)

Yea, pretty sure I am NOT voting for Obama.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Yeah I don't like Presidents who double the deficit, increase debt 6 trillion, lose jobs, etc.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Punked Up said:


> Yeah I don't like Presidents who double the deficit, increase debt 6 trillion, lose jobs, etc.


Because Romney will do so much better.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Freeloader said:


> Yea, pretty sure I am NOT voting for Obama.


Those people NEED the money, man! Or else they'd have to like, get a job or something lame like that. 

Just shut up and be okay with the government reaching into your pocket and giving your money to these people or we'll call you heartless and detached. :frustrate 

Lol fuckin' liberals, man.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Who are you going to vote for again Camille?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Gary Johnson.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Meh, at this point I'd just write in Batman as a candidate


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Yeh it sucks that he has absolutely no chance of winning and that you only have the choice between 2 candidates who are completely useless in their attempts to solve anything. We're in exactly the same position in the UK. Why is this guy not able to participate in the debates?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

i thought the UK had a three party system?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Karma101 said:


> Yeh it sucks that he has absolutely no chance of winning and that you only have the choice between 2 candidates who are completely useless in their attempts to solve anything. We're in exactly the same position in the UK. Why is this guy not able to participate in the debates?


Because the last time they had a free-thinking candidate in the debates he upset people so the debate commission (comprised of democrats and republicans) was formed to control who is allowed to participate in the debates.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Freeloader said:


> Yea, pretty sure I am NOT voting for Obama.


Wow. This is where your tax dollars go people. Live with that knowledge. 

Actually, I'll provide a quote from Ned Flanders to sum it up: 


Todd Flanders: "Daddy, what do taxes pay for?"
Ned Flanders: "Oh, why, everything! Policemen, trees, sunshine! And let's not forget the folks who just don't feel like working, God bless 'em!"


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> The woman I love second only to Mila Kunis says it best.







Nailed it.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama 2012 Nailed it.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Huganomics said:


> Nailed it.


She seems a bit crazy for some reason.

Might be the hand movement and voice combo.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Holy fuck, that Romney guy just bleeds that weird sleazy shady corporate vibe. To quote gunnery sergeant Hartman, he looks ike the kind of person who would fuck you in the ass and not have the common courtesy to give you a reach-around. Dude gives me the chills.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Redead said:


> i thought the UK had a three party system?


It technically is but at the last election parliament was hung and the very left wing Liberal Democrats (who didn't actually have many seats) joined the right wing conservatives to form a coalition, since then they've just become irrelevant and nobody trusts them anymore so they don't have a shout in the next election. Why would left wingers who previously voted for them continue to vote for them when they'd been helping the right wing government?

Answer: Nobody


----------



## GothicBohemian (May 26, 2012)

charmed1 said:


> No one is less of a fan of Harper than me. But to be fair it looks like we have another Trudeau prime ministry coming up.(yep I am calling this one early)



I used to always do campaign work for the NDP (since high school) but I halfway put myself in with the Green Party this time. I had a tough choice come election day; I knew voting my beliefs rather than going strategically for the local Liberal would have consequences in my riding – and it did, the Conservative won – but that`s the down side of the multiparty system. 

And why so certain about Justin Trudeau? I know he's bound to appeal to both a segment of the youth vote and old folks who vote for him because of his daddy, but the Liberals have been in pretty bad shape in the polls for ages...though I suppose choosing to run Trudeau like the second generation of our own version of the Kennedy clan might help loads. 

*
Oh, and on topic*...Romney comes across poorly to me. Not just his politics, which aren't for me, but there's something about his manner I find unlikeable. I'd be really unsure of what to do, or if I should even bother, if I was voting in the upcoming US election and I'm pretty serious about always using one's right to vote.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Karma101 said:


> It technically is but at the last election parliament was hung and the very left wing Liberal Democrats (who didn't actually have many seats) joined the right wing conservatives to form a coalition, since then they've just become irrelevant and nobody trusts them anymore so they don't have a shout in the next election. Why would left wingers who previously voted for them continue to vote for them when they'd been helping the right wing government?
> 
> Answer: Nobody


the liberals making an alliance with the conservatives?

wat


----------



## BANKSY (Aug 21, 2011)

The lib dems aren't really left wing , just in between labour and conservative. Even labour these days is not as left as it started out being.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Redead said:


> the liberals making an alliance with the conservatives?
> 
> wat


It's not as unusual as you think. There have been many instances where far right and far left have joined into third party coalitions, and in almost every one of those instances it ends up awful. It's like mixing lye with acid, all you get is real shitty water.

Not to mention it's fundamentally retarded as fuck.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Redead said:


> the liberals making an alliance with the conservatives?
> 
> wat


I know, makes absolutely zero sense.



Lil'Jimmy said:


> The lib dems aren't really left wing , just in between labour and conservative. Even labour these days is not as left as it started out being.


Lib dems are supposed to be further left than labour atm.


----------



## Oda Nobunaga (Jun 12, 2006)

Neither, and I'm not voting for any lesser of any "evil".


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Caesar WCWR said:


> Neither, and I'm not voting for any lesser of any "evil".


Good for you. :hb It's ridiculous people feel the need to criticize someone for voting (or not voting) their conscience.


----------



## Super Delfin (Jan 9, 2006)

Fuck both of those corrupt assholes

Gary Johnson 12! LEGALIZE


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Super Delfin said:


> Fuck both of those corrupt assholes
> 
> Gary Johnson 12! LEGALIZE


Fuck yeah! :mark:

Good to see so many brothers of LIBERTY.


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

Redead said:


> Meh, at this point I'd just write in Batman as a candidate


Batman has my vote.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

For me it was between GARY and Geoff Peterson.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Batman as a candidate is as good as Gary Johnson but odds are Batman will win first.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

CamillePunk said:


> Fuck yeah! :mark:
> 
> Good to see so many brothers of LIBERTY.


This.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Says a lot when the only thing people can say negative about Gary Johnson is that HE WON'T WIN~!

Wake up, brothers. Some already have, such as Brother Camille and Brother Deflin.


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)




----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

9QA said:


> Batman as a candidate is as good as Gary Johnson but odds are Batman will win first.


Very true. Should ask a mod to add batman to this poll just for the hell of it.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

I saw an actual Johnson yard sign on the ride home today. First time I've ever seen a yard sign for a third party candidate. Wiped a tear from my eye.


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Independent GEEKS.


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

Huganomics said:


> I saw an actual Johnson yard sign on the ride home today. First time I've ever seen a yard sign for a third party candidate. Wiped a tear from my eye.


Same here. Makes me feel proud to be a real American, fighting for the rights of every man.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Poll: Who do you think will win tonight?
Obama (68%)
Romney (32%)



----

Romney just said we need too get the "bad guys" Romney trying to get scott hall !!


---

Poll: Bob Schieffer just asked, "should the US reassess its policy in Syria and find a better way to influence events?" - Did Obama answer the question?
Yes he answered (64%)
No he dodged (36%)

Poll: Bob Schieffer just asked, "should the US reassess its policy in Syria and find a better way to influence events?" - Did Romney answer the question?
Yes he answered (43%)
No he dodged (57%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN 6:20 PM


----------



## Punkholic (Jul 6, 2009)

Obama. 'Nuff said.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

This debate is flying by...already almost 1/3 of the way done.


Poll: We're at halftime - who's winning so far?
*Obama by a lot (55%)*
Romney by a lot (15%)
Obama by a little (14%)
Romney by a little (16%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN 6:51 PM


Poll: Bob Schieffer just asked, "should the US reassess its policy in Syria and find a better way to influence events?" - Did Obama answer the question?
Yes he answered (64%)
No he dodged (36%)

Poll: Bob Schieffer just asked, "should the US reassess its policy in Syria and find a better way to influence events?" - Did Romney answer the question?
Yes he answered (43%)
No he dodged (57%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN 6:20 PM
Poll: Who had the stronger answer on Afghanistan?
Romney (35%)
*Obama (65%)*
by Steve Krakauer, CNN *7:07 PM*



Poll: on the *China* discussion...
*Obama's winning (58%)*
Romney's winning (30%)
It's about even (12%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN *7:23 PM*

*
Who won?*
Romney by a lot (19%)
*Obama by a lot (54%)*
Romney by a little (16%)
Obama by a little (12%)
by Steve Krakauer, CNN 7:29 PM


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Anyone who watched that and STILL thinks that they're different is a fool.


----------



## Olympus (Jan 3, 2011)

I'm not a big political nut, so this may be a noob question, but why are 3rd parties not given the same exposure that Republicans and Democrats get? Why are they not in the debates? Guys like Gary Johnson seem like they deserve more exposure.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Wasn't sure if Obama and Romney were opponents or RUNNING MATES during that debate. Holy shit you are deluded if you think there is a significant difference between the two after that. 

^ Third party candidates are kept out of the debates by the presidential debate commission which is comprised of democrats and republicans.


----------



## Olympus (Jan 3, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> ^ Third party candidates are kept out of the debates by the presidential debate commission which is comprised of democrats and republicans.


Figures. :no:


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

Makaveli said:


> Figures. :no:


"Democracy" at play...


----------



## GREEK FREAK (May 17, 2012)

Haha more people voted other than Romney hahah

*OBAMA **2**0**1**2**!!!*


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Two debates in a row had Romney looking completely clueless.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Makaveli said:


> I'm not a big political nut, so this may be a noob question, but why are 3rd parties not given the same exposure that Republicans and Democrats get? Why are they not in the debates? Guys like Gary Johnson seem like they deserve more exposure.


Pretty sure the last time it was allowed was when ROSS PEROT ran, but he was a billionaire so it was ok then.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

charmed1 said:


> Two debates in a row had Romney looking completely clueless.


Romney was always clueless. He doesn't even have a platform. His platform is basically "I'm not Obama" and he can't even do that right.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> Romney was always clueless. He doesn't even have a platform. His platform is basically "I'm not Obama" and he can't even do that right.


Pretty much yeah. Always amusing to ask a Romney supporter what they like about his policies.

Same could be said about an Obama supporter, but in their defense, their guy is the incumbent.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

romney's policies alternate on a question to question basis

seriously, its kind of sad


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

Saul GOONman said:


> Anyone who watched that and STILL thinks that they're different is a fool.


it's sad that America's foreign policy is basically getting on our knees for zionists.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Redead how did you feel about Obama's touching story about visiting Israel and seeing the poor kids and families who've been devastated by HAMAS? 

Taking into account the almost daily US drone strikes against several middle eastern countries, that is.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

nothing wrong with that. they are the chosen people

ah, i still remember the war. looking out the window and seeing smoke, seeing the planes dropping the bombs, and then screaming in happiness when the 'terrorists' took out their 'unbeatable' battleships from land

oh, and ofcourse the chosen children signing the israeli missiles with love for the 'terrorist kids'. trust me, you havent seen damage until you stood in the centre of what used to be daheya


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OqPyjueYf4

Not good.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)




----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Holy shit. :lmao


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Chris Matthews is a tool. The whole issue about race is so nauseous right now. If Obama did a better job these last four years, it probably would be no issue. 

Schieffer did a good job last night, he was the type of ref that let them play. He stood back, then knew how to guide back to the next question. However, some of the questions on the economy that popped up I had an issue with seeing as how this was supposed to be a debate on foreign policy. 

How would this be for interesting...articles coming out on what would happen in the event of an electoral tie. We could see Romney as President and Biden as VP, as in a tie the House selects the Pres and the Senate would select the man that is one heartbeat away.


----------



## Super Delfin (Jan 9, 2006)

scrilla said:


> it's sad that America's foreign policy is basically getting on our knees for zionists.


Lol seriously... If you took a shot everytime either of them got on their knees to suck Israel's dick last night you'd be in the hospital getting your stomach pumped.


----------



## ADC (Oct 17, 2012)

Hang on, on this forum yanks actually admit that their nation is Israels bitch? Because on the last wrestling forum I was at, they were reluctant to admit that.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Can an american please explain this to me.

Your conservative parties are very tight with the jewish owned corporations and media, i.e. Rupert Murdoch and all the other jewish led banks, firms, lobbyists, etc. And the people that define themselves as lets say republicans are supporting that pro israeli backing by those conservative parties, yet those same people (average traditionalist conservative ameicans) often seem anti semitic, have far right/nazi sympathies, especially in the south and the bible belt. How?


----------



## dan the marino (Oct 22, 2006)

ADC said:


> Hang on, on this forum yanks actually admit that their nation is Israels bitch? Because on the last wrestling forum I was at, they were reluctant to admit that.


Yes, we know. It's irritating and pathetic.

Overall though Obama looked pretty good last night whereas Romney looked relatively clueless. I'd be surprised if the election is as close as some are making it out to be.


----------



## Figure4Leglock (Aug 18, 2010)

i hope Romney wins, its only possible in America


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Redead said:


>


lmao


----------



## DBizzle (Mar 14, 2010)

ADC said:


> Hang on, on this forum yanks actually admit that their nation is Israels bitch? Because on the last wrestling forum I was at, they were reluctant to admit that.


Oh yeah - It's sad but true. What's really sad is that we give them gazillions of dollars in money. And guess which country has national health care? Israel. Hmm, but if I get sick, I'll probably go bankrupt because my insurance sucks. But of course I make too much money to qualify for aid.


----------



## Super Delfin (Jan 9, 2006)

Just a heads up to anyone that cares, the third party debate is on CSPAN right now or you can watch it online here...

http://live.freeandequal.org/stream.html


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Educate yourselves.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Anybody else watch how in the last presidential debate Obama and Romney kept trying to prove which one of them sucks Israel's dick better? Awwww yeaaaaaaa.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Gandhi said:


> Anybody else watch how in the last presidential debate Obama and Romney kept trying to prove which one of them sucks Israel's dick better? Awwww yeaaaaaaa.


They both bragged about that and they also bragged about INCREASING military spending while we're facing a 1.4 trillion dollar deficit. Romney also COMMENDED Obama's increased use of illegal drone strikes on foreign countries who we aren't at war with (and have no legal reason to declare war on, either). The only difference between the candidates' foreign policies is Romney's exaggerated lip service about "getting tough" with Russia and China. He's just trying to appeal to his older voter base that is nostalgic of Cold War days.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Figure4Leglock said:


> i hope Romney wins, its only possible in America


Mitt forgot what his tax rate was. 
Mitt forgot where he worked for three years. 
Mitt forgot what state he lived in. 
Mitt forgot where he put all his money. 
Mitt forgot that he outsourced American jobs. 
Mitt forgot that he invented Obamacare. 
Mitt forgot he was pro choice. 
Mitt forgot that he supported gay rights. 
Mitt forgot he bullied kids in school.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

I can't even fathom America's infatuation with those Zionists.. 

It seemed as if Romney and Obama were trying to one up each other... showing who really cares the most about Israel, it's sad

Obama has dropped more drone attacks on foreign countries than any other president.. fucking despicable (and I know if elected Romney won't be any different)


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> Mitt forgot what his tax rate was.
> Mitt forgot where he worked for three years.
> Mitt forgot what state he lived in.
> Mitt forgot where he put all his money.
> ...


Welcome to politics.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Is the voting machine situation something to really take a look at? Sounds like it could win Romney the election, but that whole scenario seems kind of far out.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I don't think there's a conspiracy at play but that clearly shouldn't be allowed to happen.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

#Mark said:


> I can't even fathom America's infatuation with those Zionists..
> 
> It seemed as if Romney and Obama were trying to one up each other... showing who really cares the most about Israel, it's sad
> 
> Obama has dropped more drone attacks on foreign countries than any other president.. fucking despicable (and I know if elected Romney won't be any different)


Jews are Christ's chosen people, dumb dumb.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Obama also shamelessly takes credit for ending the war in Iraq when he did no such thing, and actually wanted to extend our presence there past the George W Bush deadline. 

He is a liar and depends on the stupidity of Americans to believe everything he says.


----------



## Super Delfin (Jan 9, 2006)

ADC said:


> Hang on, on this forum yanks actually admit that their nation is Israels bitch? Because on the last wrestling forum I was at, they were reluctant to admit that.


If you have any negative criticisms of Israel in America you'll typically be discredited as an anti-Semitic Nazi racist.



Gandhi said:


> Anybody else watch how in the last presidential debate Obama and Romney kept trying to prove which one of them sucks Israel's dick better? Awwww yeaaaaaaa.


How do you feel, as an Egyptian, about both major candidates supporting the ousting of Mubarak while championing women's rights in the middle east, while at the same time groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood gain power as a result of Mubarak no longer being there, thus creating a less free Egypt for women and religious minorities in the region. It was my understanding that Mubarak's Egypt, was by standards of the region, quite open for women.



Saul GOONman said:


> Educate yourselves.


I would have loved to see the same exact questions asked to Romney/Obama. I'd have squealed with delight as both squirmed in their chair trying to justify the laws which allow Americans to be detained indefinitely with no charges against them. Funny how all of this was such a big deal to the democrats when Bush was in office, but now that Obama is the man it's cool. GTFO with that nonsense. I bet most Americans don't even know about this type of ridiculousness.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I really don't care who wins at this point, so the Ohio voting machine is a non-factor to me. We'll still get endless war, and our liberties will continue to be taken away. Obama winning would be better for the LIBERTY movement in the sense that it gives Rand Paul a shot to save this nation, but he'll have to deal with the "Chosen One" Marco Rubio.

Hopefully the American people wake up by 2016 and see what is really going on, but for that to happen, Obama needs to REALLY screw up.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

So we have one candidate that insulted 47% of the voting public and the current president that has proven why he is all flash and no substance with this whole Libya debacle (and that is putting it mildly. Seriously, this is nothing short of embarrassing) 

Yeah, fuck it. Can we just get this election over and done with?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Just remembered what Romney and the RNC did to the Ron Paul delegates. I hope RMoney and the GOP go down in flames.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Marco Rubio is no joke and will be an amazing LIAR for the GOP. I mean I almost believe his bullshit.


----------



## Mr. Carney (Sep 21, 2012)

I live in Chicago, and I'm voting for Romney. Just a personal observation, everyone was so anti-Republican and anti-Bush here in 2008 for obvious reasons, not just the fact that Illinois is usually a Liberal state. I can't remember spotting a McCain sign in the city back then. Now, the faith in Obama has decreased dramatically from my friends, people I encounter, and people in general, those same houses who didn't have signs up, or even had an Obama sign, now display Romney signs on their front lawn, which is basically asking for problems in such a Liberal neigborhood. Sure he'll win Illinois, but not near the numbers he did 4 years ago. I honestly see Mitt Romney winning this thing.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

i dont see whats so bad about the libya incident


----------



## Menacing Nemesis (Apr 22, 2008)

Aint voting, these politicians don't care about us so why bother. Only way I'll ever vote is if there's a libertarian candidate that has a shot at winning.


----------



## CDM33 (Oct 24, 2012)

Neither. I won't be voting.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Super Delfin said:


> How do you feel, as an Egyptian, about both major candidates supporting the ousting of Mubarak while championing women's rights in the middle east, while at the same time groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood gain power as a result of Mubarak no longer being there, thus creating a less free Egypt for women and religious minorities in the region. It was my understanding that Mubarak's Egypt, was by standards of the region, quite open for women.


I don't give a shit,Me being Egyptian doesn't mean I'll give a shit about Egypt because my future plans are not here.I was born and raised in Kuwait and only recently moved here,I didn't care about Egypt and when I was in Kuwait and I don't care now infact I've grown to dislike most Egyptians as people.People make fun of Americans for leaving great candidates like Ron Paul behind and leaving two lairs like Obama and Romney be at the top while Egypt had the same problem,They left the best candidates behind and voted for either the corrupt Shafik who is basically Mubarak #2 and Morsi who is the muslim brotherhood nightmare who has already started fucking the country up by mixing religion with everything.In short,I'd watch "my own country" as they say burn and wouldn't give a rat's ass.All I care about is family and friends.Most women here enjoy being ordered around by the garbage islam spews anyway and those who dislike it just move outside Egypt,I plan to move outside Egypt too "for good" very soon.


----------



## BLKJeez. (Oct 25, 2012)

I do not like to talk politics, so I will not say anything.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Obama supporters questioned about "Romney"'s policies. 

(they are all actually Obama's policies)

Partisanship is hilarious.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Redead said:


> i dont see whats so bad about the libya incident


Oh yeah, those 4 dead Americans that requested and were denied the security they needed in a tense, volatile area is just one of those minute details. Totally not a big deal.



fpalm


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Are we seriously going to station soldiers at every embassy where tensions are high? I'm cool with it since it means those soldiers probably won't die, but would it have even mattered? Would the soldiers sent there have died too? 

The problem with the situation is that they had no clue what happened, which is actually understandable, and they may or may not have made up lies to make it seem not as bad. That's why it's shady.


----------



## MachineKelly (Oct 25, 2012)

I do not like to talk politics, so I will not say anything.


----------



## bigbuxxx (May 28, 2011)

MachineKelly said:


> I do not like to talk politics, so I will not say anything.


good thread to click on to not talk about politics. moron.

i'm not voting because no matter who wins it's the lesser of two evils and nothing good will come from them.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Seriously you guys should watch the video I posted. Hilarious. Wonder which one was 9QA.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Taking this time to again remind all the folks here to not insult each other. This hasn't happened often, which is good considering the subject, and the one above isn't actually insulting someone's opinion, but still just don't use insults.

THANKS

I watched it and laughed CP.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

GOON The Legend said:


> Educate yourselves.


More like GOATY Johnson, amirite.


----------



## scrilla (Jan 18, 2008)

ADC said:


> Hang on, on this forum yanks actually admit that their nation is Israels bitch? Because on the last wrestling forum I was at, they were reluctant to admit that.


shamefully, yes.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> Obama supporters questioned about "Romney"'s policies.
> 
> (they are all actually Obama's policies)
> 
> Partisanship is hilarious.


The typical American voter, everyone.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Punked Up said:


> Oh yeah, those 4 dead Americans that requested and were denied the security they needed in a tense, volatile area is just one of those minute details. Totally not a big deal.
> 
> 
> 
> fpalm


not for me, im not american

besides, lets not forget who armed those awful terrorists that did the deed


----------



## Joel Anthony (Jan 25, 2012)

Romz, because I get money.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Obama handled the aftermath of the Benghazi incident the best he could imo


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I wouldn't put it past Obama to cover up what really happened in Benghazi, with the hope that the truth doesn't come out until after election day.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

GOON The Legend said:


> I wouldn't put it past Obama to cover up what really happened in Benghazi, with the hope that the truth doesn't come out until after election day.


http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/24/us-usa-benghazi-emails-idUSBRE89N02C20121024

Youtube video, huh? Obama is scum.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

With more and more stuff coming out about the Benghazi incident, it just confirms my beliefs about Obama from the start more and more. All flash, no substance.

My question is when is Michael Moore going to make this movie?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Barack Obama with a advantage in Nevada .In Nevada voters are *50% for Obama* and 47% for Romney.In Colorado, the race is tied at 48% for each candidate. 

Following the third presidential debate's focus on foreign policy and national security, Obama retains an advantage on the subject. His edge over Romney was 51% to 44% in both states.

Obama at 48% and Romney at 45% in Ohio.

video - if Obama gets this on nov 6 he wins !!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA, what are your thoughts on Obama allowing an American ambassador and four US Navy Seals to die, and then covering it up?

If this was Romney, you would be hearing people calling for his impeachment and to put him on trial for treason.

THIS is the October Surprise that seems to happen every election. Nothing can top this, regardless of what that lawyer is trying to dig up about Romney. I don't like Romney at all, but this should (and probably will) cost Obama the Presidency. This is Obama's watergate.

Even if Obama does win reelection, I don't think he will make it through his term if all of this stuff about Benghazi is true. We'll have another Nixon on our hands, and we'll have President Biden for about two years before RAND PAUL saves us.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Four more years of Obama might guarantee a Republican victory in 2016, but it doesn't mean much if the wrong Republican gets the nomination. A neo-con is no better than a liberal.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

What was covered up? That it didn't happen? US Intelligence is kinda bad. It's totally possible they got awful information. Still, I don't like it either. It's shady.

Neo-cons are worse. They ruin everyone's lives but their own. At least a liberal might help some poor lazy bastard somewhere in East Texas...but that guy still votes Republican.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

It just absolutely amazes me that everything that has happened in the Middle East is all Israel's fault. And then you wonder why the Israelis are telling everyone to go fuck themselves. They have every right to protect their homeland, you have a nutjob in Iran who wants to destroy Israel and nations like Egypt are wanting to do the same. I hope and pray one day that people will wake up and realize radical Islam is responsible for what is going on in the Middle East and not Israel, but I'd better find more realistic goals, like world peace first. 

Michigan and Wisconsin are dead heats now, several other states that were Obama's by about five points are narrowing as well.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

That nut in Iran doesn't call the shots. He's just a figurehead to obfuscate the real power. I'm not sure what Iran gains by him sword rattling though.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> Four more years of Obama might guarantee a Republican victory in 2016, but it doesn't mean much if the wrong Republican gets the nomination. A neo-con is no better than a liberal.


Agreed. I'm really conflicted on what I want to see happen in this election. If Obama wins, it guarantees a Republican victory in 2016, which like you said, doesn't mean much if someone like Rubio or Ryan wins the nomination. We're banking on Rand winning in 2016, but it's entirely likely that someone like Rubio or Ryan is the next President. If Romney wins, we have a neo-con in office, but we have Obama out, who is a traitor to this nation if what is being revealed is true. 

It's lose-lose for us, at the moment. Just sit back and hope shit doesn't hit the fan, brothers. 



MrMister said:


> What was covered up? That it didn't happen? US Intelligence is kinda bad. It's totally possible they got awful information. Still, I don't like it either. It's shady..


I felt the same way until it was revealed that they knew it was a terrorist attack two hours after it happened, and that the Obama Administration lied about it when they knew it was a terrorist attack all along. This is Watergate x 1,000.

Unless Obama was one of those GEEKS who don't check their email everyday.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> Four more years of Obama might guarantee a Republican victory in 2016, but it doesn't mean much if the wrong Republican gets the nomination. A neo-con is no better than a liberal.


If the conservatives keep making wild comments and wasting their time talking about topics like abortion then they still won't have a chance in 2016.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

I don't know. Marco Rubio can spin things pretty well and he's Latino. That's going to be a big deal in upcoming elections.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

BruiserKC said:


> Michigan and Wisconsin are dead heats now, several other states that were Obama's by about five points are narrowing as well.



Obama getting a win is all i care about a win is a win.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

GOON The Legend said:


> 9QA, what are your thoughts on Obama allowing an American ambassador and four US Navy Seals to die, and then covering it up?





9QA said:


> Obama getting a win is all i care about a win is a win.


Answer my question.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Goddamn, Obama is stupid, and desperate for putting this video up on his shitty Youtube page. 

This video really can divide people, dividing women, making them seem like slabs of meat, all of them just looking for a guy, and I'm sure it makes a lot of people feel uncomfortable, including a good portion of the male demographic.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Answer my question.


good


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Jesus Christ.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

:bosh


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

"Hurricane Sandy as the October election surprise"

http://news.yahoo.com/hurricane-sandy-october-election-surprise-160031906.html

Just food for thought.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Jesus Christ.


omg neo-con


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mithro said:


> Goddamn, Obama is stupid, and desperate for putting this video up on his shitty Youtube page.
> 
> This video really can divide people, dividing women, making them seem like slabs of meat, all of them just looking for a guy, and I'm sure it makes a lot of people feel uncomfortable, including a good portion of the male demographic.


That's just stupid. Obama already has most of the female voters. He didn't even need to do that.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

^No he doesn't. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/mitt-romney-obama-poll_n_2015373.html

The end is nigh. President Willard "Mitt" Romney.


----------



## Brye (Jan 28, 2006)

CamillePunk said:


> Obama supporters questioned about "Romney"'s policies.
> 
> (they are all actually Obama's policies)
> 
> Partisanship is hilarious.


Holy fuck.

I can't say I know every policy on both sides but I fucking cringed during that.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> ^No he doesn't. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/mitt-romney-obama-poll_n_2015373.html
> 
> The end is nigh. President Willard "Mitt" Romney.


Gotta love that Huffington Post electoral map, I'm telling you, Romney's gonna get Florida, easy, same with Virginia, he's gonna get Ohio, NH, possibly Wisconsin, Colorado, and thanks are actually really close in Michigan. 

Most of those will come true, unless there's a major gaffe, or an October surprise before the election.

I know both candidates are shills, but I want Romney to win, just to see all those liberal tears shed.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Mithro said:


>


Wow. That might be the worst presidential campaign ad I have ever seen. 

It comes across as narcissistic (voting for you is like sex, huh?), stupid, and just a desperate attempt to win the young women voters. 

Between this ad, his complete lack of preparation for the first debate, the almost daily gaffs from people in his campaign including himself, and his fiasco in handling the Libya situation, I am starting to think he doesn't want to win.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Mithro said:


>


Wow. That might be the worst presidential campaign ad I have ever seen. 

I am not sure if this comes across as narcissistic (voting for you is like sex, huh?), stupid, or just a desperate attempt to win the young women voters. 

Between this ad, his complete lack of preparation for the first debate, the almost daily gaffs from people in his campaign including himself, and his fiasco in handling the Libya situation, I wouldn't blame anybody for accusing him of trying to lose on purpose. If I didn't know better, I would probably think that myself.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

You guys are actually serious about that ad? OK

It's lame though I agree.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

The concept may have been ok in theory but it is a bit cringe worthy in execution.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> ^No he doesn't. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/mitt-romney-obama-poll_n_2015373.html
> 
> The end is nigh. President Willard "Mitt" Romney.


You've changed your gimmick again.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

The choice is clear: Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, two staunch defenders of liberty, will be our new leaders, and I welcome them, as the lead singer of Creed once put it: "With Arms Wide Open". The corrupt, and pure evil administration that Barack HUSSEIN Obama has tortured us with the last four years will soon come to an end, and be replaced with true Americans with upstanding moral character and unshakable beliefs. 

If you're American, go out and vote for Mitt Romney for President of the United States. Mitt and Paul will fight for you and the constitution, and that is why I endorse Mitt Romney for President of the United States. 

God bless,

GOON the Legend.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Gary Johnson on CNN

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/be...ideo/bestoftv/2012/10/26/exp-gary-johnson.cnn


----------



## RDEvans (Jul 9, 2012)

Really interested in seeing who gets North Carolina, Florida and Ohio


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

The polls show Obama with a lead of around 3 or 4 points, enough to make him a favorite for victory.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA said:


> The polls show Obama with a lead of around 3 or 4 points, enough to make him a favorite for victory.


What polls are you looking at?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MrMister said:


> You guys are actually serious about that ad? OK
> 
> It's lame though I agree.


My problem with the ad is that it implies women need to be, or should be, dependent on the government.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> My problem with the ad is that it implies women need to be, or should be, dependent on the government.


The Democrats want everyone to be dependent on the government because if they are, they would never be voted out. We cannot let this happen, so we must vote for Mitt Romney.

#CantAffordFourMore


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

9QA said:


> The polls show Obama with a lead of around 3 or 4 points, enough to make him a favorite for victory.


Don't be so delusional. Romney is up 4 in Rasmussen and 6 in Gallup (two awarded most reliable pollsters last cycle) and their polls show Romney leads in NC, VA, FLA, and CO and a tie in Wisconsin and Ohio. Also in play in Penn, Iowa, NH, and Nevada.

Obama's losing, dude.


----------



## ThePeoplezStunner3 (Sep 7, 2012)

Just let :vince2 be president.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Oh man GOON quoting Creed songs. Success.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

I'm liking Goon's new gimmick.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Just sent this video to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. How bad do you want it, Mitt? It's obvious that Barack HUSSEIN Obama doesn't want it anymore, but you have to REALLY want it; not just KIND OF want it. I stand with Mitt!

#CantAffordFourMore


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Nothing makes me appreciate where I live more than listening to republican's. Its like listening to Fred Phelps rant on an on. The crazier he sounds the more you appreciate your sanity and tolerance.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1101


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

MrMister said:


> Oh man GOON quoting Creed songs. Success.


Creed sucks balls.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

Trump should really take the offer

Obama has to be the luckiest man in he world because he is up against an incompetent governor that is completely out of touch with the American voter, not to mention the republican party that goes out of it's way to insult and degrade "binders" full of women. You can't continue to shoot yourself in the foot and expect to run for a presidency.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

DubC said:


> I'm liking Goon's new gimmick.


But what's the point in being a troll when nobody believes you actually are one.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Karma101 not understanding undecided voters.


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

charmed1 said:


> Nothing makes me appreciate where I live more than listening to republican's. Its like listening to Fred Phelps rant on an on. The crazier he sounds the more you appreciate your sanity and tolerance.


This.



Karma101 said:


> But what's the point in being a troll when nobody believes you actually are one.


Lack of social life.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

This was some serious rape in the ass.

:lmao Okay this one was funnier:


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

"You disagree with my political views, so you're a troll."

EDIT- What a great video posted by Brother Camille.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Just sent this video to Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan. How bad do you want it, Mitt? It's obvious that Barack HUSSEIN Obama doesn't want it anymore, but you have to REALLY want it; not just KIND OF want it. I stand with Mitt!
> 
> #CantAffordFourMore


Why capitalize Hussein?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

_Because he's the hero America deserves, but not the one it needs right now. So we'll hunt him. Because he can take it. Because he's not our hero. He's a silent guardian, a watchful protector. A white knight._- *Paul Ryan*​


----------



## Super Delfin (Jan 9, 2006)

I've been looking around the Gary Johnson FB page just caused I was bored. So many Romney supporters seem to think he may cost him the election. I can only speak for myself, but I'd have to imagine it's true for many others. I'd rather not vote than cast a vote for Romney or Obama, so in my opinion that statement is inaccurate to some extent.

"A wasted vote is voting for someone you dont believe in"


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Myers said:


> Trump should really take the offer
> 
> Obama has to be the luckiest man in he world because he is up against an incompetent governor that is completely out of touch with the American voter, not to mention the republican party that goes out of it's way to insult and degrade "binders" full of women. You can't continue to shoot yourself in the foot and expect to run for a presidency.


fpalm

Romney was saying something good, in an inarticulate manner. Also, Romney was great as a governor. Jesus, you don't follow politics much, do you?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Gary Johnson goes CROWD-SURFING.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

I'm changing my vote.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Thank god he isn't George W Bush!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

“If you don’t have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare the voters, If you don’t have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from.”- Barack Obama.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Geez, I hope Obama can win. Right wingers are nuts, I can tolerate the moderate ones but I could never ever vote right wing, screw that.

Anyone know who is leading in the polls?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

PunkSE316 said:


> Geez, I hope Obama can win. Right wingers are nuts, I can tolerate the moderate ones but I could never ever vote right wing, screw that.
> 
> Anyone know who is leading in the polls?


What are your issues specifically with "right wingers", and what specifically do you like about Obama?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> What are your issues specifically with "right wingers", and what specifically do you like about Obama?


Right wingers don't give a shit about anyone except for themselves and their rich buddies. The moderate right wingers are okay but most of the right wingers are in it for themselves.

Obama seems like a genuine cool guy. I would have preferred Hillary or Edwards in office but Obama is cool and I don't have any problem at all with him. If Romney gets in office, then yeah...fuck that.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

obama is cool?

thats a reason to vote for him?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Redead said:


> obama is cool?
> 
> thats a reason to vote for him?


What? I'm just talking about character in that sentence.

Obama is going to advance health care, the economy is in turmoil from what Bush and his goons did. Obama can better the economy, I don't know why anyone would want to vote for Romney and go back to the wacky right wing ideas? Fuck that.

On a sidenote, I'm Australian but I believe that Obama will do great for the USA in the next four years. Romney wont do jackshit. The economy is in such bad shape due to Bush and his buddies from that fake "war" in Iraq, Wall Street etc.

It's hard for Obama to go through with everything with the right nuts turning it down. Neo Con Republicans are just not good people.


----------



## Coffey (Dec 18, 2011)

I'm voting for Tom Waits.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

In Wisconsin President Obama still show a 2.7% edge for President Obama in the poll averages.

Obama 50%-Romney 46% in Ohio


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

PunkSE316 said:


> What? I'm just talking about character in that sentence.
> 
> Obama is going to advance health care, the economy is in turmoil from what Bush and his goons did. Obama can better the economy, I don't know why anyone would want to vote for Romney and go back to the wacky right wing ideas? Fuck that.
> 
> ...


That's funny, seeing as Obama is Wall Street's biggest slave boy.

Also, lol at all the vaguery, misinformation, buzzwords, and shitty disproven propaganda on that list of "reasons". I'm glad you're unable to vote in this election, people like you shouldn't be voting.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

asides from the push to healthcare, honestly i would not have been able to tell the difference from bush to obama asides from fox news shift to anti president


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Redead said:


> *asides from the push to healthcare*, honestly i would not have been able to tell the difference from bush to obama asides from fox news shift to anti president


And this new shitty healthcare law forces you to get it, or you have to pay a fine, and you're still paying to insurance companies, but at much higher rates rates.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

and its also like medicare

yeah, obama is bush

ah well


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I love how uninformed Americans think Canadian healthcare is a good system.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

well im assuming the european one is decent

or atleast the german one. everything in germany is so nice


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

The NHS over here in the UK is really good, I couldn't imagine living without it tbh.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Um, a bunch of Republicans turned down a bunch of Obama's ideas....surely that has hurt a lot of his original promises to fuck up and thus not go through? I believe there is a lot of racism still in America within rich right wing Americans (Trump, Imus etc.)

Shut up Mithro, you are full of shit

Ditto on the free healthcare, I love it over here in Australia with the Health Care, I don't know how I would live without. Especially in my case where I have Chron's disease and health care over here in Australia has been awesome towards myself and many others. I don't know why so many Americans are paranoid about free health care. It's FREE!

Some people just have some twisted ideas.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

new polls out shows Obama is 4 points up in Virginia and 4 points up in Ohio


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> I don't know why so many Americans are paranoid about free health care. It's FREE!


That's the problem.

But hey, Obama seems like a p. cool guy. He sung Al Green once and tells funny jokes at dinner parties. I don't care if he bombs innocent civilians, is just as big of a war hawk as Bush, and signed the NDAA. Not to mention his covering up of what happened in Libya, and it looking worse by the day.

But hey, he seems to be a pretty cool guy outside of that.

Christ. 

Oh, and #CantAffordFourMore


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

new polls out shows Obama is 4 points up in Virginia and 5 points up in Ohio


http://www.cnn.com/video/?hpt=po_t1#/video/bestoftv/2012/10/26/exp-tsr-king-ohio-polls-magic-wall.cnn

Obama is now *5 points up in Ohio*


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

GOON The Legend said:


> That's the problem.
> 
> But hey, Obama seems like a p. cool guy. He sung Al Green once and tells funny jokes at dinner parties. *I don't care if he bombs innocent civilians,* is just as big of a war hawk as Bush, and signed the NDAA. Not to mention his covering up of what happened in Libya, and it looking worse by the day.


People dont care though. Neither do I. Aint like he is bombing Europe or anything.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

JasonLives said:


> People dont care though. Neither do I. Aint like he is bombing Europe or anything.


Wow.






*Disclaimer from GOON:* Do not watch if you don't like watching pretty violent things.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

LoL at americans not having a national healthcare. What the hell do you spend your taxes on, more bombs? If i lived in a country with taxes like USA's i better get a free fuckin Aspirin for my tax money. You remind me of peons in the 13th century. You wont get anything if you don't fight for it muppets.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> That's the problem.
> 
> But hey, Obama seems like a p. cool guy. He sung Al Green once and tells funny jokes at dinner parties. I don't care if he bombs innocent civilians, is just as big of a war hawk as Bush, and signed the NDAA. Not to mention his covering up of what happened in Libya, and it looking worse by the day.
> 
> ...


It's free, that is the problem? What in the....so you would rather the lower, middle, even the high class get in to mountains of debt over something that can be insured? Wow, no wonder why the USA is in such a mess. So ignorant.

As big a war hawk as Bush? Get the fuck out of here. Bush put the USA in to debt THROUGH fucking up the Middle East. Yes, something needed to be done but why not get Osama quietly exactly the way that Obama organised? It's all about violent messes with these crazy right wingers, you guys are fucking nuts. Bush fucked up everything. He was in't even invited to the RNC, lol.

As long as the neo con Republicans cause war and are giving the money to themselves, and they're buddies. They don't give a fuck about anyone.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> It's free, that is the problem? What in the....so you would rather the lower, middle, even the high class get in to mountains of debt over something that can be insured? Wow, no wonder why the USA is in such a mess. So ignorant.
> 
> As big a war hawk as Bush? Get the fuck out of here. Bush put the USA in to debt THROUGH fucking up the Middle East. Yes, something needed to be done but why not get Osama quietly exactly the way that Obama organised? It's all about violent messes with these crazy right wingers, you guys are fucking nuts. Bush fucked up everything. He was in't even invited to the RNC, lol.
> 
> As long as the neo con Republicans cause war and are giving the money to themselves, and they're buddies. They don't give a fuck about anyone.


Yeah, that is a problem. Who pays for it? Where does the money to pay for it come from? Just giving something like that out for free and giving the federal government MORE power isn't the solution. Read THIS. It lays out a plan to fix the healthcare industry without giving away healthcare for free and giving the federal government more power. Educate yourself.

Obama has gotten the United States involved in Libya, wanted to EXTEND the troops' stay in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't allow that, and Obama was FORCED to withdraw the troops on BUSH'S timetable that Bush set up. Obama had nothing to do with it. He still keeps the troops in Afghanistan, where they're basically sitting ducks. He drops drone missiles on innocent civilians, and has used more drones in four years than Bush had used in his entire term. Military wise, he is Bush on Steroids. Stop letting your hate for the GOP blind you from that fact.

You just described the Democrats with that last sentence as well. Shows how much you know about politics. Obama is in the pocket of Wall Street as well.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

GOON The Legend said:


> Wow.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Some pretty sweet explosions in that one! That video affect me as much as the videos from the poor people in Africa. And you dont exactly see million and million of rich people going there to help. Why? Because majority dont care.

You can Wow all you want. Its sad, but I sure isnt in minority on this one. Because majority of people dont care for the middle east. Not unless ( from a US point of view ) americans die over there.
The only downside about bombing the middle east is all immigrants wanting to go somewhere else, like here. Not good, not good at all.

I personally dont know why the US even bothers with the middle east. Its those shady Russians they should keep an eye on.




> He drops drone missiles on innocent civilians, and has used more drones in four years than Bush had used in his entire term


Good for him. No need to risk his own people flying in there if you can get computers to do it for you. Thats smart in my book!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You really don't get it, do you?


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Yeah, that is a problem. Who pays for it? Where does the money to pay for it come from?


You pay for it. Just like you pay for the newest experimental drones, highways, police and that little car that collects rocks on Mars. You do realize that every single modern country except the USA has a national healthcare because it has been proven as cheap, reliable, effective, and what's most important humane. Your right to keep 0.00001% of your profit does not surpass someone's right to keep a gangrenous foot, no matter what the sociopaths at the Tea Party told you. 



> giving something like that out for free and giving the federal government MORE power isn't the solution.


Yeah, instead of giving more power to a democratic people elected goverment, it's far better to give more power to CEOs of 1 percenter corporations and lobbyists because the interests of the every day citizen are what those folk are all about of course. :lmao


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

"A government big enough to give you everything you need, is a government big enough to take away everything that you have."- Thomas Jefferson.

But hey, what did the founding fathers know?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Yeah, that is a problem. Who pays for it? Where does the money to pay for it come from? Just giving something like that out for free and giving the federal government MORE power isn't the solution. Read THIS. It lays out a plan to fix the healthcare industry without giving away healthcare for free and giving the federal government more power. Educate yourself.
> 
> Obama has gotten the United States involved in Libya, wanted to EXTEND the troops' stay in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't allow that, and Obama was FORCED to withdraw the troops on BUSH'S timetable that Bush set up. Obama had nothing to do with it. He still keeps the troops in Afghanistan, where they're basically sitting ducks. He drops drone missiles on innocent civilians, and has used more drones in four years than Bush had used in his entire term. Military wise, he is Bush on Steroids. Stop letting your hate for the GOP blind you from that fact.
> 
> You just described the Democrats with that last sentence as well. Shows how much you know about politics. Obama is in the pocket of Wall Street as well.


:jordan

The government covers the payments, obviously? Lmao. Typical conservative. "Oh, no, we'll give money that could be extremely useful back to the government that can be used to be spent on more useless shit like Wall Street!" It would be a whole different sector of payments. In case you haven't noticed..my country Australia is doing wonderful with our economy, and a lot of folks here in Australia are blessed with free health care. One day, you will realise.."Hey, this free health care thing isn't so bad after all" Or a complete douchebag like Trump and his rich buddies could put their selves to use by taking a Tax cut to help out with the health car reform thus in order for the Government to create new jobs, those are two options you could do but the first is so much easier.

Yeah because you know it's not like Bush put him in the same mess with the Middle East like he very much did with the economy mess. Bush is/ was such a fucking moron. Innocent lives of Troops and civilians in the Middle East have been lost thanks to that guy, and now Obama is stuck trying to combat the mess that Bush left. How is that for a fact.

Obama was put in to a corner by all the Republican nuts turning down his ideas. The right wingers have nearly destroyed the United States. I really really hope Obama can win.

So awesome how Billy boy schooled Romney in his speech at the DNC.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

PunkSE316 said:


> :jordan
> 
> The government covers the payments, obviously? Lmao. Typical conservative. "Oh, no, we'll give money that could be extremely useful back to the government that can be used to be spent on more useless shit like Wall Street!" It would be a whole different sector of payments. In case you haven't noticed..my country Australia is doing wonderful with our economy, and a lot of folks here in Australia are blessed with free health care. One day, you will realise.."Hey, this free health care thing isn't so bad after all" Or a complete douchebag like Trump and his rich buddies could put their selves to use by taking a Tax cut to help out with the health car reform thus in order for the Government to create new jobs, those are two options you could do but the first is so much easier.


But comyuuunizmmmmmmm :bron3


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> :jordan
> 
> The government covers the payments, obviously? Lmao. Typical conservative. "Oh, no, we'll give money that could be extremely useful back to the government that can be used to be spent on more useless shit like Wall Street!" It would be a whole different sector of payments. In case you haven't noticed..my country Australia is doing wonderful with our economy, and a lot of folks here in Australia are blessed with free health care. One day, you will realise.."Hey, this free health care thing isn't so bad after all" Or a complete douchebag like Trump and his rich buddies could put their selves to use by taking a Tax cut to help out with the health car reform thus in order for the Government to create new jobs, those are two options you could do but the first is so much easier.
> 
> ...



Australia has about 22 million people to take care of health-wise, the United States has over 314 million people. There's clearly not a strain on resources that will be here if universal health care kicks in. Not to mention EVERYONE's taxes will go sky high to pay for it. That means, down the road, that there will be a rationing of care and it will boil down to one person being denied it because the government felt it had to go to this person instead. You see that in other nations right now, that's why Canadians come down to the United States to get procedures done that they were denied. I'm sorry, but I refuse to put my health decisions in the hands of the government. 

At least when Bush was running the show, we showed that we were strong and willing to do what it takes to defend the United States. Obama has proven to be nothing more than a weak apologist that is over his head when it comes to foreign matters. He apologizes for all that America has not done right, but forgets all the good we do. That's why Al-Qaeda has grown stronger now, with a regional presence in northern Africa. That's why Iran is speeding along with its wanting of building a nuclear arsenal. That's why we have alienated our allies in the Middle East and Europe, and emboldened our enemies. 

If what happened to the Libyan ambassador happened on a Republican's watch, the outcry from the media and many liberals/Dems in this country would be off the Richter scale. Those that are silent now for that reason are unpatriotic and borderline treasonous. And yes, I will call those people unpatriotic for the simple reason they are fine with what's going on because one of their own is in power, where if the other party was running the show they'd be screaming up a storm. 

I understand the economy still needs work, but Obama has made things worse over his four years. The bailouts and stimulus plans haven't worked, and right now the economy is about to collapse worldwide. China and Europe are also teetering as well, won't be long before the bottom drops out if we don't do something about it. And spending our way out won't do anything but push us over the fiscal cliff. We can't keep spending money we don't have. 
Not to mention that Obama makes no effort to compromise or work with anyone. 

At least Clinton, FDR, and other leaders in the past have been able to get the Reps on board with their major agenda and every other major legislation in U.S. history has had both Reps and Dems support. Obamacare had no Republican votes because it was rammed through in a partisan fashion. As far as Clinton, he's a great politician and a great speaker, but he lost any credibility for me when he lied to a grand jury about banging Monica Lewinsky. I don't care that he banged her, if I was married to Hilary I'd probably be hunting for strange outside the home myself. I care that he lied and committed perjury for it. Either he should have said it is none of your business or that he tore it up.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

BruiserKC said:


> Australia has about 22 million people to take care of health-wise, the United States has over 314 million people. There's clearly not a strain on resources that will be here if universal health care kicks in. Not to mention EVERYONE's taxes will go sky high to pay for it. That means, down the road, that there will be a rationing of care and it will boil down to one person being denied it because the government felt it had to go to this person instead. You see that in other nations right now, that's why Canadians come down to the United States to get procedures done that they were denied. I'm sorry, but I refuse to put my health decisions in the hands of the government.
> 
> At least when Bush was running the show, we showed that we were strong and willing to do what it takes to defend the United States. Obama has proven to be nothing more than a weak apologist that is over his head when it comes to foreign matters. He apologizes for all that America has not done right, but forgets all the good we do. That's why Al-Qaeda has grown stronger now, with a regional presence in northern Africa. That's why Iran is speeding along with its wanting of building a nuclear arsenal. That's why we have alienated our allies in the Middle East and Europe, and emboldened our enemies.
> 
> ...



It's simple with the health care policy. You look at a Wall Street type figure, or a Donald Trump, they take a tax cut to help with the building of the new reformed health care, while the President and his colleagues create new jobs while also juggling to pay off the debt left by Bush Jnr and his stooges.

Yeah, when Bush was running the show, he put the country in to a fake war so he could rain out the oil from Iraq, he gave up on the priority of the whole trip, and that was to take out that evil human called Osama Bin Laden but no, Bush decided to take on Iraq..for God knows what reason. It's cringeworthy stuff, a ton of troops dead for..oil? It's disgusting, something that the US is still recovering from, it's terrible. 

Obama was given all of those bad problems by Bush..you really expect him to get rid of all of the debt just like "that"? I even knew back in 2008 or so that no matter who got voted in, they couldn't all of a sudden end the financial crisis..it was/is very messy. Obama inherited a lot of problems from Bush. While the Wall Street rich guys ran away with their money, and payouts...it's a joke. How can anyone not reflect back on those circumstances and think "Shit, that was bad..it's going to take a bit to recover from that mess.." And it will, Obama is doing his best..it will only get better from here on in, granted..it wont be like 2000 all over again but it will somewhat improve.

What happened in Libya was terrible, the poor guy didn't deserve anyof what he got..just a tragedy and actually beyond terrible. See, the thing is..the embassy is authorised..if you are saying "Oh, well, the right wing would get this and that if it was on their watch" And if you are referring back to the Iraq War etc. the "War" wasn't even authorised, it was an invasion! Totally different things. It's just a tragedy what happened and no one can deny that.

Again, the economy is a mess. Obama is doing his very best to fix it, and again..the Republicans fucked everything up, Obama is doing the best he can..it will get better soon.

So what if Bill got a blowjob from Monica??? It's not worse than fucking up a whole economic system like Bush did. It's not just Bush either, guys like Rupert Murdouch fucked a lot of things up by CHEATING to get Bush in to office. The world can be a fucked up place.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> It's simple with the health care policy. You look at a Wall Street type figure, or a Donald Trump, they take a tax cut to help with the building of the new reformed health care, while the President and his colleagues create new jobs while also juggling to pay off the debt left by Bush Jnr and his stooges.
> 
> Yeah, when Bush was running the show, he put the country in to a fake war so he could rain out the oil from Iraq, he gave up on the priority of the whole trip, and that was to take out that evil human called Osama Bin Laden but no, Bush decided to take on Iraq..for God knows what reason. It's cringeworthy stuff, a ton of troops dead for..oil? It's disgusting, something that the US is still recovering from, it's terrible.
> 
> ...


The money is going to not come from the likes of Trump, but from everyone to pay for health care. EVERYONE's taxes here in the United States would go up. How do you think it gets paid for Down Under? Don't know how old you are, but if you're old enough to work, your taxes pay for it. If you're still in school, then your parents pay for it with their taxes. TANSTAAFL. 

The war in Iraq was not for oil, we have not seen any of this oil everyone talks about. That's why we are now paying nearly $4 a gallon for gas and Iraq enjoys cheap gas. The intel that Bush went on was what the rest of the world was using also in regards to believing Saddam Hussein still had a weapons program, which he clearly did at one time when trying to build a nuclear program and using poison gas on the Kurds and on Iranian soldiers during the Iran-Iraq war. Besides, he was a monster that murdered many of his own people and had to go. I think Bush had no idea what he was doing when going in, but Saddam had to go and I'm good with that. I wish he would have let our troops do the job rather than handcuff them, or we would have been out long before we were. 

I understand the economy needs time to recover, but we have not seen any progress. Obama has made things worse. Four times the debt, the deficit is up as well. Unemployment hasn't improved as we still have people looking for jobs and many have given up. In reality, our unemployment is understated and probably closer to 13-14%. Our government hasn't seen a budget in about two years passed by Congress so naturally the wealthy and small-business owners are sitting on their money right now as they don't know what's going to happen. If a decision is not made about the tax cuts by the end of this year, all taxes are going up. This will push our economy over the fiscal cliff. The same is being played out right now throughout Europe and China. Obama has had four years to change things and it ain't working. It's time to move on and find someone who will make the changes needed, including cutting down on wasteful government spending. 

As for the Wall Street folks, notice that people like Ken Lay and Bernie Madoff were arrested during Bush's tenure. Not one single person that has taken advantage of the rules has seen arrest since Obama took office. 

UN Resolution 1441 provided the U.S. with the approval to go to war with Iraq. Congress had authorized military action also prior to the invasion. On the other hand, Obama sends American planes and attacks Libya with no OK from the UN or Congress. Obama violated international law and the U.S. Constitution. At least Bush got permission and followed all laws in the U.S. and internationally. 

What happened in Libya was a tragedy and there is no denying that. The problem I have is that someone in the government dropped the ball and needs to be held accountable for not having adequate security for our embassy there, especially when no other Western nation had their embassy open there. I want heads to roll and careers to end if people are that damn incompetent. The problem is that there are people in this country that put politics over principle. When it comes to our security, I don't play that. The media is strangely silent for the most part, and many of the same people (Dems and liberals) that screamed about Bush's being accountable for Iraq, etc...are silent or defending Obama. If this happened to Bush, the media would have been tracking this story the way my dog tracks a deer during hunting season. Those people are unpatriotic and dangerous. That double-standard can't happen. 

Again, I don't care that Clinton got a hummer from an intern, although he could have upgraded as he was leader of the Free World and gotten his freak on with a supermodel or head of state or top government official instead. I care about the fact he lied to a grand jury and committed perjury, which is a crime. Obama flouts the law also, with his refusal to enforce immigration laws, passing of the DREAM act creating amnesty for children of illegals which should be Congress' call, and military action against other nations without consent from Congress. You talk about Rupert Murdoch, there are assclowns like George Soros trying to buy the election for Obama this time around.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

i just love this map


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

9QA said:


> i just love this map


Isn't it who has the most states that wins?


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

Karma101 said:


> Isn't it who has the most states that wins?


Almost, according to that map obama has 25 states and romney has 24. Doesn't matter though, Romney's a clown and isn't winning.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I wouldn't be so sure a Romney loss is certain. He's still going to take Florida, North Carolina, and probably Virginia. If anything, Romney is gaining in momentum, and will gain more after more of this stuff about Libya is exposed. Michigan wasn't in play for Romney two weeks ago and now it's considered a toss up state. Same goes for Wisconsin, not to mention he's only down by about two in Ohio.

If I was Obama, I'd be a bit worried. President Romney wasn't realistic two months ago. Now it is, and Obama only has himself to blame for it.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Didn't the polls also say that the Reagan-Carter election would be close?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Yeah, I think they said that or they said that Carter would obliterate Reagan, when the opposite happened. Don't know exactly.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Karma101 said:


> Isn't it who has the most states that wins?


No. It's who has the most electoral votes. Electoral votes are tied to the population of each state. California has the most and it goes down the line. So winning a lot sparsely populated states isn't that great.


Pretty sure polls rarely predict what's going to happen. LISTEN TO NATE SILVER.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

Oh, I thought Karma was joking. :lmao


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

I'm assuming everyone is serious here save GOON.

Oh and me 50% of the time.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

*gallup* REGISTERED VOTERS Obama48% Romney47% -

A new *Star Tribune Minnesota* Poll has found that President Obama holding a 3-point lead

Independents, are leaning more toward Obama. Barely a third supported him last month, but that number has grown to 43 percent.

The poll was conducted among 8,000 likely voters .Lake is not fond of any of the presidential choices but says Obama should get another term.

"No one is going to fix something in four years that was ruined in eight," the 54-year-old said.

Is Wisconsin the new Ohio? It's beginning to feel that way. As the presidential race hurtles toward a dramatic conclusion, both campaigns are suddenly locked in an intense battle to win the Badger State and its 10 Electoral College votes. Vice President Joe Biden stormed through the state on Friday, beginning with a stop in Oshkosh and finishing with an afternoon rally before some 1,500 raucous supporters in Kenosha.

“Folks, we need you” Biden exhorted the crowd at the end of his 30-minute speech. “Together we can win Wisconsin, and when we win Wisconsin, we will win this election!”

A new poll from Rasmussen Reports underscored just how close the contest has become here: President Obama and Mitt Romney were tied at 49 percent each in the poll of likely voters, conducted Thursday. Overall, Obama leads by just 2.3 percent in the RealClearPolitics Average in Wisconsin

Ohio remains the focal point, thanks to the electoral math; whichever candidate wins the Buckeye State and its 18 electoral votes has a much easier route to reach the magic number of 270.Obama IS UP 5 points in Ohio

President Barack Obama has an advantage in the battleground state of Virginia, a new poll released Saturday shows.

Likely Virginia, voters are *51% for Obama* to 47% for GOP challenger Mitt Romney in the *Washington Post poll* and *CNN* out Saturday.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Lol @ citing the Washington Post and CNN as your polls.

Also, registered voters don't matter. It's the likely voters that matter, and Romney is winning by a decent margin there.


----------



## Punkholic (Jul 6, 2009)

It's very likely that the winner of the popular vote in this election won't be the winner.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Myers said:


> Oh, I thought Karma was joking. :lmao


Yeh I was being serious, I am not American and had no idea how it worked. Kinda makes sense now though.

However, I have a different question, when Bush got into power didn't something questionable happen with one of the states and he shouldn't of actually got in? What happened here?


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Yeah the 2000 will always be controversial. The state of Florida couldn't get their vote count right and dragged on for months. In their defense it was incredibly close and the consequences were enormous. The Supreme Court finally weighed in and gave the presidency to Bush. We'll never know who actually won that state and thus the presidency.


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

MrMister said:


> Yeah the 2000 will always be controversial. The state of Florida couldn't get their vote count right and dragged on for months. In their defense it was incredibly close and the consequences were enormous. The Supreme Court finally weighed in and gave the presidency to Bush. We'll never know who actually won that state and thus the presidency.


The vote count just so happened to get messed up in the state where Jeb Bush was governor? Wow what a coincidence...


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

BruiserKC said:


> The money is going to not come from the likes of Trump, but from everyone to pay for health care. EVERYONE's taxes here in the United States would go up. How do you think it gets paid for Down Under? Don't know how old you are, but if you're old enough to work, your taxes pay for it. If you're still in school, then your parents pay for it with their taxes. TANSTAAFL.
> 
> The war in Iraq was not for oil, we have not seen any of this oil everyone talks about. That's why we are now paying nearly $4 a gallon for gas and Iraq enjoys cheap gas. The intel that Bush went on was what the rest of the world was using also in regards to believing Saddam Hussein still had a weapons program, which he clearly did at one time when trying to build a nuclear program and using poison gas on the Kurds and on Iranian soldiers during the Iran-Iraq war. Besides, he was a monster that murdered many of his own people and had to go. I think Bush had no idea what he was doing when going in, but Saddam had to go and I'm good with that. I wish he would have let our troops do the job rather than handcuff them, or we would have been out long before we were.
> 
> ...


Um, the likes of Trump and anyone very similar..they make like hundreds of millions of dollars, they would surely be okay to take a tax cut for the Health care reform process.

Bush was trying to fit his Daddy's war, he got carried away and put a ton of troops lives in danger in the process. No WMD was found, it was all a lie in order to get oil, it's pretty simple.

Saddam was an extremely evil man but the normal thing to do would not to put innocent civilians in harms way with bombing the shit out of some places that didn't even ignite 9/11. You take care of Saddam by tracking him down, similar case with how they took care of Osama.

You really though that ANYONE from 2009 to 2012 would be able to fix the economy up? It's impossible, it's going to take a ton of small steps here and there to get it rolling again.

Yeah, those two did get put in jail but the three wise men sure didn't go in, they are off now on their yachts, spending millions of dollars from the pay outs they got from Bush and co. They escaped without any scars.

The Libya and Iraq "war" are two different things, granted there were deaths in both incidents but the Iraq "war" was drawn out a lot, and what were the US even doing there? A ton of troops have spoken out on it...everything is so messy and cluttered atm that Obama has been forced to keep them in Iraq, it's fucked.

You are comparing Soros to Murdoch? Hahahaha. Wow. Murdoch is a piece of shit who approved the Iraq war, he has a stronghold here in Australia by bashing people on the left in the newspapers, media etc. Left wingers need their voices to be raised otherwise all you would get is News Ltd bullshit, because News Ltd have done so much good for the world, right?

If Romney wins, a lot of people will lose their jobs even more, and it will get worse.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

*Pictured:*The mindset of every left winger when it comes to Obama.

Bush goes to war= BAD
Obama goes to war= GOOD

Bush kills innocent civilians with drones: PURE EVIL
Obama kills innocent civilians with drones: IT HAPPENS

Bush curtails civil liberties= IMPEACH HIM AND PUT HIM ON TRIAL FOR TREASON
Obama curtails civil liberties= IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTRY.

Stop it.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Good post, GOON. Irrefutably correct observation of the hypocrisy of the partisan hacks which make up most political Americans.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> *Pictured:*The mindset of every left winger when it comes to Obama.
> 
> Bush goes to war= BAD
> Obama goes to war= GOOD
> ...


What in the...

Bush started that Iraq mess..and things only got worse when time went on..similar to the economy mess..Obama has been forced to stay there. You are so blind.

Civil liberties? Bush turned the whole economy upside down and screwed everything up. Bush is like the little kid who made a mess and Obama is the preschool teacher who has to come and clean up the mess.

Right wingers hate reality.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> What in the...
> 
> Bush started that Iraq mess..and things only got worse when time went on..similar to the economy mess..Obama has been forced to stay there. You are so blind.
> 
> ...


Obama isn't "forced" to do anything. He is the Commander in Chief. He could have withdrawn the troops the day he took office, but the troops are STILL in Afghanistan and he tried to keep them in Iraq, but he had to withdraw on Bush's timetable.  That means he CHOSE to keep them there, and it was his decision. He's also gotten the United States involved in Libya, and is now funding al-Qaeda in Syria.

Civil liberties has nothing to do with the economy. Obama extended the Patriot Act, which was brought into law under BUSH. Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which allows the indefinite detention of American citizens. Along with that, Obama has had two American citizens killed without due process.

More Obama civil liberty violations here

Despite what the media has told you, Obama has been an awful President, and is BUSH on steroids. I provided you with facts here. Take them as you wish.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> Um, the likes of Trump and anyone very similar..they make like hundreds of millions of dollars, they would surely be okay to take a tax cut for the Health care reform process.
> 
> Bush was trying to fit his Daddy's war, he got carried away and put a ton of troops lives in danger in the process. No WMD was found, it was all a lie in order to get oil, it's pretty simple.
> 
> ...


It is obvious you have not actually read anything I typed. 

Government health care is a massive overreach of the federal government. I don't trust the government with making decisions about my health. Trump is already on record saying he'll pay the penalty...errr....tax from Obamacare. He's rich enough he can pay for most medical procedures out of pocket anyway, most other rich people will do the same thing. 

Not one bit of Iraqi oil has come into this country after the war, the argument of it being a war for oil doesn't hold. 

We had the chance to finish Saddam off in 1991, but the United Nations wouldn't hear of it. And we did track him down and get him, same with his sons. 

Progress is one thing, but Obama's small steps are in the opposite direction of progress. He is making things worse. His plans have done nothing but push our economy to the brink of financial collapse. 

Soros is even worse than Murdoch is. Soros has been notorious for currency speculation, which back in 1992 nearly brought Britain's financial market crashing around it. He's also been guilty of insider trading in France as well. He openly uses his money to subvert political systems throughout the world. As for Murdoch, his voice is one conservative against many liberal voices in Australia, Britain, and the United States. And Murdoch doesn't use his wealth to subvert the political process. 

I respect you, sir, for being respectful and not bashing the hell out of me because we disagree. But, it would help if you read what I typed and then disagree rather than just spout the typical liberal viewpoints without actually reading what the other side is saying. Just saying.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

PunkSE316 said:


> What in the...
> 
> Bush started that Iraq mess..and things only got worse when time went on..similar to the economy mess..Obama has been forced to stay there. You are so blind.


How can you say GOON is blind when you seem to be under the impression that the US is still in Iraq? We withdrew out troops in December of 2011, in accordance with the withdrawal deadline agreed to by George W Bush. In fact, Barack Obama wanted to keep 10,000 US troops in Iraq BEYOND George Bush's deadline. 

Now Obama has tripled our military presence in Afghanistan, gotten us involved in Libya, is considering arming/funding rebels in Syria, and has greatly ramped up drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Obama is a bigger warhawk than Dick Cheney, even. How ironic that he was given a nobel peace prize during the first year of his presidency. 

Unfortunately regarding civil liberties Obama simply has no leg to stand on. He extended the PATRIOT act and signed the NDAA, allowing any American citizen to be indefinitely detained without due process. Also thanks to Obama we'll be seeing drones used in civilian space to spy on, well, anyone the government feels like spying on. 

As far as the economy? Obama is spending more than the current deficit alone on his socialist healthcare vision. And, as he proudly bragged during the presidential debate, continues to increase military spending every year. 

Of course, Romney would not be an improvement in any of these areas, nor have I ever or will I ever support Romney's presidential bid, but I have to take issue with anyone trying to portray Barack Obama as anything less than a complete failure of a president.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

BruiserKC said:


> It is obvious you have not actually read anything I typed.
> 
> Government health care is a massive overreach of the federal government. I don't trust the government with making decisions about my health. Trump is already on record saying he'll pay the penalty...errr....tax from Obamacare. He's rich enough he can pay for most medical procedures out of pocket anyway, most other rich people will do the same thing.
> 
> ...


A lot of the involvement in Iraq had A LOT to do with oil: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...n-oil-firms-and-invasion-of-iraq-2269610.html

The link above gives you plenty of retracted statements that still ring true from all of those years back with Blair, Bush and co.

Trump has never approved Obamacare at all. It's just all about saving the money to himself when in a time of need, where everyone needs help, him and his rich buddies just keep it all to themselves. He doesn't give a fuck, don't fool yourself. Just sayin.

Muroch doesn't use his money for any political purposes? Fox News who has a macho right wing neo con view..doesn't carry any political views supplied by with Murdoch's money? And a whole chain of other outles that he has. Telling my country Australia that all left wing politicians are horrible, endorsing Romney with billions of dollars, hacking phones in the UK and bribing the Police...please, just stop.

It doesn't matter even if JFK came back from the dead and became president of the USA, even he couldn't fix the economy issue. It's a mess, and for anyone to blame it on Obama and his team, they have short term memory.

Norman Lamont had far more to do with the Black Wednesday incident than George Soros did. That is a fact.

Um, Rumsfeld while under the Reagan administration armed Saddam with weapons ffs. The Republicans knew what was up, thus them saying "We have to go to Iraq for the WMD's" They knew that themselves supplied that nutcase with weapons but they had all ready been used up by the time Bush Jnr came over to get the WMD's. It's messed up.

Obama is still cleaning the mess up that those rich college boys gave him.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 doing his best 9QA impersonation ITT. Debate my facts, sir.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> How can you say GOON is blind when you seem to be under the impression that the US is still in Iraq? We withdrew out troops in December of 2011, in accordance with the withdrawal deadline agreed to by George W Bush. In fact, Barack Obama wanted to keep 10,000 US troops in Iraq BEYOND George Bush's deadline.
> 
> Now Obama has tripled our military presence in Afghanistan, gotten us involved in Libya, is considering arming/funding rebels in Syria, and has greatly ramped up drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen, and Somalia. Obama is a bigger warhawk than Dick Cheney, even. How ironic that he was given a nobel peace prize during the first year of his presidency.
> 
> ...


The Patriot act was extended due to Obama having to compromise with the right wing, they turned all his ideas so he had to get something through in exchange for the Act to get extended...

I know that the US isn't in Iraq but I also know that so many other circumstances still revolve around it in the Middle East with Bush and Cheney screwing everything up there, it's going to take time to rebuild but it's the Middle East that we are talking about, they are still living in the 17th century ffs. It's a messy place. The right wing sure didn't help matters when they bombed the fuck out of it when they could have just tracked down Osama and Hussein with the intelligence that they had in their possession. 

Obama is not a bigger "warhawk" than Cheney. Cheney is the guy that STARTED the mess ffs. You think if those two were not there so many years back and fucked everything up with everything that we would be in the hole we are in right now? Fuck no.

Obama is only going to get better from here on in, no one could scoop up the mess that was laid by Bush and co. It's going to take time. I even knew this back like 4 or 5 years ago when Obama came in.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Unfortunately your posts have been all liberal media narrative and no substance. You've presented no facts to back up that narrative either.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> The Patriot act was extended due to Obama having to compromise with the right wing, they turned all his ideas so he had to get something through in exchange for the Act to get extended...
> 
> I know that the US isn't in Iraq but I also know that so many other circumstances still revolve around it in the Middle East with Bush and Cheney screwing everything up there, it's going to take time to rebuild but it's the Middle East that we are talking about, they are still living in the 17th century ffs. It's a messy place. The right wing sure didn't help matters when they bombed the fuck out of it when they could have just tracked down Osama and Hussein with the intelligence that they had in their possession.
> 
> ...


My God, you really buy into the stuff the leftist media tells you is true, huh? 

Let me ask you this: Did the GOP force Obama to extend the Patriot Act, something he campaigned against back in 2008? No, he did it under his own free will, and he had no reason to do so. He didn't just do it to appease the GOP either, as he signed the NDAA as well under his own free will, all the while sending White House lawyers to keep the indefinite detention clause in the bill.

Obama is "bombing the fuck out of the Middle East" as well with his drone strikes, more so than Bush ever did. The fact is that Bush and Cheney are out of power now, and Obama is CONTINUING their policies. How can you not see this? He wanted to keep the troops in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't allow it, as they insisted that the troops be withdrawn on BUSH'S timetable. 

Obama is just as bad as Bush.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Obama isn't "forced" to do anything. He is the Commander in Chief. He could have withdrawn the troops the day he took office, but the troops are STILL in Afghanistan and he tried to keep them in Iraq, but he had to withdraw on Bush's timetable.  That means he CHOSE to keep them there, and it was his decision. He's also gotten the United States involved in Libya, and is now funding al-Qaeda in Syria.
> 
> Civil liberties has nothing to do with the economy. Obama extended the Patriot Act, which was brought into law under BUSH. Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which allows the indefinite detention of American citizens. Along with that, Obama has had two American citizens killed without due process.
> 
> ...


It's NEVER been that Obama has been FORCED to it's from the repercussions brought on by the past war lurking by Bush and co. How can you not see that?

The Repubs shot down every single one of Obamas ideas thus he has to compromise with them, it was a Bush idea with the Patriot act, Bush is a Republican...you connect the rest of the dots.

Obama will lead the US in to recovery and the Republicans have to stop being little bitches about everything, and think about the people for once, not their rich corporate friends. Bush on steroids, huh? Anyone would have been Bush on steroids around this time of the year, lol, he fucked up everything, it's all Bush's doing along with Dick. Please, just think outside the box for once.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> It's NEVER been that Obama has been FORCED to it's from the repercussions brought on by the past war lurking by Bush and co. How can you not see that?
> 
> The Repubs shot down every single one of Obamas ideas thus he has to compromise with them, it was a Bush idea with the Patriot act, Bush is a Republican...you connect the rest of the dots.
> 
> Obama will lead the US in to recovery and the Republicans have to stop being little bitches about everything, and think about the people for once, not their rich corporate friends. Bush on steroids, huh? Anyone would have been Bush on steroids around this time of the year, lol, he fucked up everything, it's all Bush's doing along with Dick. Please, just think outside the box for once.


What repercussions are you talking about? He can have every soldier out of there tomorrow if he wanted, but he is choosing, based on his own free will, to leave them there. Stop blaming Bush when Obama is choosing to leave them there and continue to wars. Obama is in complete control of this. The military answers to nobody but him.

So of all the things he could have compromised with them on, why did he choose the Patriot Act, which is something he campaigned AGAINST in 2008? Funny, he also "compromised" with the GOP by extending the Bush Tax Cuts, which he also campaigned against, that the left absolutely hated for its tax breaks to the rich. Obama knew damn well that the GOP wasn't going to vote for any of his plans, and that is why he pushed through the healthcare while he still had the majority in the House and the Senate. Him extending the Patriot Act wasn't an act of compromise; it was him doing what he wanted. Was the NDAA an act of compromise as well? Is sending lawyers to allow the indefinite detention clause to remain in the NDAA a "compromise"?

I've given you reasons as to why Obama is Bush on Steroids. He's continued the wars (and started new ones), continues to bomb the Middle East, and continued Bush's assault on civil liberties. Please, just think outside of your leftist box for once.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> What repercussions are you talking about? He can have every soldier out of there tomorrow if he wanted, but he is choosing, based on his own free will, to leave them there. Stop blaming Bush when Obama is choosing to leave them there and continue to wars. Obama is in complete control of this. The military answers to nobody but him.
> 
> So of all the things he could have compromised with them on, why did he choose the Patriot Act, which is something he campaigned AGAINST in 2008? Funny, he also "compromised" with the GOP by extending the Bush Tax Cuts, which he also campaigned against, that the left absolutely hated for its tax breaks to the rich. Obama knew damn well that the GOP wasn't going to vote for any of his plans, and that is why he pushed through the healthcare while he still had the majority in the House and the Senate. Him extending the Patriot Act wasn't an act of compromise; it was him doing what he wanted. Was the NDAA an act of compromise as well? Is sending lawyers to allow the indefinite detention clause to remain in the NDAA a "compromise"?
> 
> I've given you reasons as to why Obama is Bush on Steroids. He's continued the wars (and started new ones), continues to bomb the Middle East, and continued Bush's assault on civil liberties. Please, just think outside of your leftist box for once.


So close minded. He obviously can't pull them out of those countries due to the patriot act passed through which was a compromise to the Republicans, how can you not see that? So Bush could get everything through when he was around with a 15% approval rating and Obama is a bad guy who shouldn't be aloud to have any act pass through Congress? You guys are so unbelievable, it's just mind blowing how one side you are. 

Of course, he was against compromising the bill that Bush passed in..but it was last resort and I'm disappointed with that but the Republicans were turning down everything from everywhere! It's all about their rich buddies, fuck em.

Me in a leftist box? You know like how you are in neo con ring wing box. LOL. See, I have left wing ideas but I can still stand up and see what is wrong, especially if the Left wing block out censorship with music while allying with the Right wing. I'm far from a sheep but I do know Obama was handed a complete mess from Bush.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> He obviously can't pull them out of those countries due to the patriot act passed


Do you even know what the Patriot Act is???? The Patriot Act has *NOTHING* to do with his ability to withdraw troops. Come back when you know what you're talking about, son. 

Now, allow those who know what they're talking about discuss the goings on in the United States political spectrum.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

How can you call someone who is being critical of militarily aggressive policies a neo-con? Do you know what the term means, I wonder?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Do you even know what the Patriot Act is???? The Patriot Act has *NOTHING* to do with his ability to withdraw troops. Come back when you know what you're talking about, son.
> 
> Now, allow those who know what they're talking about discuss the goings on in the United States political spectrum.


I obviously fumbled my words around as I was typing at a fast pace like I am now. Fuck off, don't call me son.

The Repubs obviously pressured Obama in to a lot of decisions, the Patriot act being one of them, it's common sense. You know that, everyone does. The act is obviously to combat terrorism acts by groups in the Middle East and wherever they may be. Of course, the Repubs would have wanted it extended, it's something that they created, son.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> I obviously fumbled my words around as I was typing at a fast pace like I am now. Fuck off, don't call me son.
> 
> The Repubs obviously pressured Obama in to a lot of decisions, the Patriot act being one of them, it's common sense. You know that, everyone does. The act is obviously to combat terrorism acts by groups in the Middle East and wherever they may be. Of course, the Repubs would have wanted it extended, it's something that they created, son.


The Republicans didn't pressure Obama into anything. He had no incentive to extend the Patriot Act at that point, as he already had his healthcare passed. What pressure was he put under? Do you have proof of this?

The Patriot Act has NOTHING to do with the Middle East. It has to do with combating domestic terrorism via wiretaps, and spying on American citizens. Plus, it was the REPUBLICANS who were questioning whether Obama extending the act via "Autopen" was even constitutional in the first place. But hey, I thought it was part of a "compromise?"

It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about. Just stop it.

EDIT- Also, glad to know you know and fully understand the definition of Neo-Con. Can you define it for me, and then give examples where I exemplified traits of being a Neo-Con?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

neocons are the worst

but liberals too are the worst

but not as bad as those moderates


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> The Republicans didn't pressure Obama into anything. He had no incentive to extend the Patriot Act at that point, as he already had his healthcare passed. What pressure was he put under? Do you have proof of this?
> 
> The Patriot Act has NOTHING to do with the Middle East. It has to do with combating domestic terrorism via wiretaps, and spying on American citizens. Plus, it was the REPUBLICANS who were questioning whether Obama extending the act via "Autopen" was even constitutional in the first place. But hey, I thought it was part of a "compromise?"
> 
> ...


Neo conservatives are pro-bombing, pro-empire heavyweight intellectuals who have filled the vacuum on the Right, where most Americans have little interest in foreign policy. They dominate Republican foreign policy because they care about it, whereas most Americans don't. NATO expansion was an example; most Americans don't think about it and don't care. "Neo cons" do. Also they heavily influence the Democratic Party from whence they came. They are close to European Social Democrats, many of whom have also now favor pro-interventionist wars, since the collapse of communism.

"Neo conservatives" are mostly former leftists/liberals who converted to conservatism during the '70's and when Ronald Reagan became President. In domestic policy they tend to be moderate "welfare" Republicans. However, their major concern is foreign policy. They strongly favor US military interventions overseas and becoming the world’s policeman. They promoted the First Iraq War and are constantly the instigators for more confrontation with Iraq, Iran, the Sudan, and other Moslem states. They were among the chief instigators of the Kosovo War.

Oh, no..hear that everyone? Obama signed with an autopen, golly gosh! I'm sure it's not any worse than Romney not showing his tax returns or Trump finding "divorce papers" You love to have everything your way but once someone else gets a turn it's "THIS IS COMMUNIST RUSSIA!" You really think you do any good to the society with that type of attitude?

I have no idea what I'm talking about? Hahahaha, that is funny. You are leaving out A LOT and just rampaging on Obama, while not looking at the tracks that you guys left in the midst of all the chaos several years back.

Hey but what do I know? You quoted a Creed song in an endorsement for Romney. LMAO.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> *Neo conservatives are pro-bombing, pro-empire heavyweight intellectuals who have filled the vacuum on the Right, where most Americans have little interest in foreign policy. They dominate Republican foreign policy because they care about it, whereas most Americans don't. NATO expansion was an example; most Americans don't think about it and don't care. "Neo cons" do. Also they heavily influence the Democratic Party from whence they came. They are close to European Social Democrats, many of whom have also now favor pro-interventionist wars, since the collapse of communism.
> 
> "Neo conservatives" are mostly former leftists/liberals who converted to conservatism during the '70's and when Ronald Reagan became President. In domestic policy they tend to be moderate "welfare" Republicans. However, their major concern is foreign policy. They strongly favor US military interventions overseas and becoming the world’s policeman. They promoted the First Iraq War and are constantly the instigators for more confrontation with Iraq, Iran, the Sudan, and other Moslem states. They were among the chief instigators of the Kosovo War.*
> 
> ...


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze1tvxm/thepoliticalarena/What's A Neo-Conservative.htm

Go away.

Oh, and gotten to by Scott Stapp.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Yes, a link redirecting you on to "Iconservative" where the definition was published, and put forth on the website. I gave you a definition on the meaning and now you want me to go away? Sounds like you aren't use to people standing up against your opinions.

Scott Stapp who is obviously in Creed..can't mention Creed without him..obviously. Enjoy Creed though, they are up there with Nickelback for sure.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Don't think it gets any more pro-bombing than Barack Obama. He bombs countries we aren't at war with. :lol Like, every couple of days, at that. If it didn't happen yesterday or today, it's goin' down tomorrow. The kids are terrified every day. They aren't American or Israeli though, so fuck 'em - Barack Obama. 

In any case, calling GOON a neo-con is way off the mark as he's non-interventionist. The complete opposite of being a hawkish neo-con.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Congratulations, you can copy and paste a definition. I was expecting you to put some thought and not just copy and paste a definition but hey, you had no idea what the Patriot Act was so I guess my expectations were just to high.

But please, explain how I fit into that term.

Also, this article is intriguing. Recommended reading for all those who aren't wearing partisan glasses.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Congratulations, you can copy and paste a definition. I was expecting you to put some thought and not just copy and paste a definition but hey, you had no idea what the Patriot Act was so I guess my expectations were just to high.
> 
> But please, explain how I fit into that term.




I copied and pasted a definition....what is wrong with that? Nothing. I explained what the Patriot act was before, it's an act to combat terrorism in the USA.

Uh, you have said that Obama is "pure evil" If that isn't extreme right than I don't know what is, you have extreme right wing views for sure...you are helping out the Romney campaign ffs, it doesn't get any more obvious.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You said twice that the Patriot Act had to do with the Middle East. Either you're a horrible typist, or you had no idea what the Patriot Act really was until I corrected you.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> You said twice that the Patriot Act had to do with the Middle East. Either you're a horrible typist, or you had no idea what the Patriot Act really was until I corrected you.


I'm not the best with typing on my computer keyboard considering that my RAM is pretty messed up and it's all type out slowly...I was pointing out it was obvious that there was Middle East type problems surrounding the Act since well..it's made to combat terrorism, and the majority of that comes from the Middle East so of course Obama would be fling the pressure of staying there until it's all settled caused by the mess their several years ago back in '03...so in order to work with the act Obama has the troops over there to keep an eye on things. I hate war and so do many others but in saying that we need to help them out in certain areas in the Middle East especially with their army. Romney wouldn't fix anything up over there...


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

lol @ the posters saying Brother Goon is "right wing", apparently trying to have a grown up conversation without name calling is impossible now-a-days.

Romney is clearly winning the race, not by a lot but he has a clear advantage going in to election day. Obama looks pretty desperate with these all out blitzes of negative ads, but he still has a chance. What's sad is that I know a lot of people voting for Obama but they refuse to put up yard signs or bumper stickers or any sort of indication of their voting preference, when 4 years ago Obama signs were littered everywhere. Obama is the incumbent, logic is that independents/undecided voters tend to break to the challenger by a healthy margain when they finally get to the voting booth.

If Romney has a clear advantage now, he's heading in to election day as the heavy favorite...despite whatever MSNBC or the NYT are saying, USE LOGIC.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

PunkSE316 said:


> Uh, you have said that Obama is "pure evil" If that isn't extreme right than I don't know what is, you have extreme right wing views for sure...you are helping out the Romney campaign ffs, it doesn't get any more obvious.


Actually he was supporting Obama a few weeks ago before he started supporting Ron Paul then he went back to supporting Romney. His gimmick is being a political troll.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> Actually he was supporting Obama a few weeks ago before he started supporting Ron Paul then he went back to supporting Romney. His gimmick is being a political troll.


Thanks for the heads up man. I figured something weird was up..


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

The only thing that changes is my avatar. P. sure I haven't deviated from my PRO-LIBERTY message outside of the "endorsement".


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1126


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)




----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Roger Sterling said:


> lol @ the posters saying Brother Goon is "right wing", apparently trying to have a grown up conversation without name calling is impossible now-a-days.
> 
> Romney is clearly winning the race, not by a lot but he has a clear advantage going in to election day. Obama looks pretty desperate with these all out blitzes of negative ads, but he still has a chance. What's sad is that I know a lot of people voting for Obama but they refuse to put up yard signs or bumper stickers or any sort of indication of their voting preference, when 4 years ago Obama signs were littered everywhere. Obama is the incumbent, logic is that independents/undecided voters tend to break to the challenger by a healthy margain when they finally get to the voting booth.
> 
> If Romney has a clear advantage now, he's heading in to election day as the heavy favorite...despite whatever MSNBC or the NYT are saying, USE LOGIC.


I'll assume you are either trolling or joking. No one is delusional enough to think Romney has a chance..even other conservatives dont think hes doing a good job.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

charmed1 said:


> I'll assume you are either trolling or joking. No one is delusional enough to think Romney has a chance..even other conservatives dont think hes doing a good job.


Really now?

Romney leads Obama by four points in latest Gallup poll.

THIS proves Roger Sterling right as well.


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

I think Mittens is going to win now.



> Romney leads Obama by four points in latest Gallup poll.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Mitt Romney just sent me a TOUT with his reaction to reading 9QA's "polls".


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

Mittens is hilarious. I can't wait until he throws Obongo and his mosshead ******* ******* quashie sooty ***** Uncle Tom ass out of the *WHITE* HOUSE.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

charmed1 said:


> I'll assume you are either trolling or joking. No one is delusional enough to think Romney has a chance..even other conservatives dont think hes doing a good job.


Oh Jesus...Romney is now winning in North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and Colorado according to Rasmussen and Gallup polls )two most accurate pollsters in 2008). Rasmussen also has him tied in Wisconsin, New Hampshire and ahead in Ohio. Romney has quite a chance. I won't say it's definite, but he's in a great position and no incumbent has ever won with approval/poll numbers at this stage in the game. Ever. Fact. Also, his favorable #'s now are ahead of Obama's in every way. I'm sure I'll get lots of red rep for this because some liberals don't want to accept the truth (typical), but there you go. An argument with solid facts other than "lol ur delusional"


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Really now?
> 
> Romney leads Obama by four points in latest Gallup poll.
> 
> THIS proves Roger Sterling right as well.


Well..I stand corrected..on a related note..you guys are screwed. Romney getting elected isn't the message you wanna send the rest of the world.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

You're gonna sit there and let neo-con scum GOON link to the NATIONAL REVIEW. 

Should've been The Huffington Post IMO ITT.

Only read a few sentences in the National Review article. The writer cited national polls. National polls are garbage. We use the lelectoral college to elect the president. What's happening on a national scale doesn't matter at all.

We need socialism ITC so we can have a smoother changeover to COMMUNISM. Can't wait. We'll do it right since we're America (fuck yeah). If a Kenyan has to be the one to lead us there, so be it.


OK

How long will this election last? Obviously it won't be decided the night of the election, and don't mean that the actual electoral election happens later either. There might be as many as 5 or 6 states that are too close to call if we go by these polls. What chaos that will be. I'm assuming all the news networks are hoping for this.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I'd put more stock into that Gallup poll imo. Independents are by far and away going toward Romney, and more people identify themselves as Republicans than Democrats now in 2012 (only by 1%, but still).

The independents are the ones that will give this election to Romney.

Also, STAND DOWN, Brother MrMister with all of that diabolical SLANDER.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Punked Up said:


> Oh Jesus...Romney is now winning in North Carolina, Florida, Virginia and Colorado ....





Poll: Obama slightly ahead in Colorado

Poll: White House race tied at 45%-45% in NC


CNN Poll: Romney 50% -- Obama 49% in Florida

51% for Obama to 47% for Mitt Romney in Virginia

this is the map 










map shows what polls are now


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

*GNN EXCLUSIVE: Mitt Romney seizes command in new polls; Barack Obama all but finished.*
_By GOON the Legend_​
*Washington, D.C.*In a shocking turn of events, it seems that Governor Mitt Romney has seized control in not only the national polls, but in numerous other states that he otherwise was counted out of just weeks ago. 

In a poll conducted by GNN on Sunday, we are able to calculate that Mitt Romney has cinched up the states of Florida, Virginia, and North Carolina, and has taken a lead in the swing states of Ohio, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. If these numbers hold, then Mitt Romney will become the next President of the United States, and the pure evil administration of Barack Obama will come to a halt.

In our poll, we called every registered voter in the United States and got a straight answer from all of them. According to our findings, Mitt Romney has also taken a lead in the states of Minnesota, Michigan, Iowa, Colorado, Nevada, New Hampshire, and OREGON. Yes, Mitt Romney has taken a lead in the state of Oregon, and it seems to have been spear-headed by an endorsement from a man by the name of "Rican" earlier in the week. 

GNN was told by an anonymous source in the Obama Administration that they feel that they're "finished, and that the jig is up next Tuesday." This source also said that she is considering switching to Team Romney so she could be apart of _America's Comeback Team _.

This isn't shocking, considering how God awful Barack Obama has been since taking office, and how Mitt Romney provides a breath of fresh air to a nation that has been suffocated under the disastrous and pure EVIL policies of the Obama Administration for the last four years.









_Pictured: The new electoral map that GNN has produced._​


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

^^^ I just saw this on FOX News.


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

:lol


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

That's getting close to Nixon/McGovern dominance. By next week Romney could take California and NY. Even Illinois could come into play.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MrMister said:


> That's getting close to Nixon/McGovern dominance. By next week Romney could take California and NY. Even Illinois could come into play.


My colleagues at GNN are working on a huge story regarding one of those states, but cannot reveal which one for HYPE~! purposes. Will post the story soon.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

It's to bad romney isn't winning, I was looking forward to Alabama getting outsourced to the Chinese.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

I hope Goon realizes that Gimmick posting can get you ban.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

DubC said:


> I hope Goon realizes that Gimmick posting can get you ban.


Probably politicking with the mods.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Myers said:


> ^^^ I just saw this on FOX News.


lol


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

DubC said:


> I hope Goon realizes that Gimmick posting can get you ban.


Considering MrMister is enjoying the gimmick posts I doubt he's about to ban him for them. He's really only made two gimmick posts anyway.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1145


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)




----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Sadly my candidate None of the Above isn't going to win. Too bad.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Rasmussen has Romney on pace to win 279 electoral votes.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

God if they actually put Romney in office...


It's like they enjoy being a laughing stock to the rest of planet earth.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

The rest of the world finds Obama p. funny. Romney will just maintain the status quo.

RAND PAUL, on the other hand......


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Cliffy Byro said:


> God if they actually put Romney in office...
> 
> 
> It's like they enjoy being a laughing stock to the rest of planet earth.


It's funny cause regarding foreign policy, Barack Obama is just George W Bush on steroids.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> It's funny cause regarding foreign policy, Barack Obama is just George W Bush on steroids.


Romney is a laughing stock to us because he's anti-socialism, personal freedoms, sex equality, ecology, secularism, etc. To me personally, he's like a bad throwback to some shitty times 60 and more years ago. Good thing loony sociopaths like that are quickly marginalized and laughed off their soapboxes around here.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Romney is a laughing stock because he' anti-socialism?

Romney 2012, then.

Obama is a p. big laughing stock to those who actually pay attention to what he does.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Obama is the most anti-personal freedoms president in our history. Extended the patriot act, signed the NDAA, and is bringing drones to our own local neighborhoods.

Also interesting the media and other countries' leaders don't seem to want to discuss the illegal drone strikes against countries we never declared war on. George Bush violates international law and he's a war criminal. Obama does it and people in other countries are begging us to re-elect him. What?


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Romney is a laughing stock because he' anti-socialism?
> 
> Romney 2012, then.


Oh dear, you'll learn eventually yanks


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Evil Neville said:


> Oh dear, you'll learn eventually yanks


Explain to me the benefits of Socialism, please.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Explain to me the benefits of Socialism, please.


Well, i'll speak for my country. There are a couple of nice things like complete social security, no poverty, very high education level, high standards of living and GDP per capita, very low number of crimes, direct democracy (the closest thing to anarchism you can find in the world today), personal freedoms, general happiness of the population, very liberal views towards matters of ethnicity, nationality, religion, freedom of speech, beautifuly perserved enviroment, high end infrastructure, etc.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Which country do you live in? Socialism would have a better chance of working in a smaller country, but it would never work in the United States. Too many people to give basically free things to.

Free Market Capitalism is the way to go. Damn shame the United States hasn't tried it yet.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Which country do you live in? Socialism would have a better chance of working in a smaller country, but it would never work in the United States. Too many people to give basically free things to.
> 
> Free Market Capitalism is the way to go. Damn shame the United States hasn't tried it yet.


Hehe, it doesn't work the way you americans are apparently told to. Also, by the interactions with you guys online, every one of you seems to interchange socialism with communism. 

And if there could even hypothetically be such a thing as free market capitalism, it would be everything but free market, but that's another story.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

Evil Neville said:


> Well, i'll speak for my country. There are a couple of nice things like complete social security, no poverty, very high education level, high standards of living and GDP per capita, very low number of crimes, direct democracy (the closest thing to anarchism you can find in the world today), personal freedoms, general happiness of the population, very liberal views towards matters of ethnicity, nationality, religion, freedom of speech, beautifuly perserved enviroment, high end infrastructure, etc.


And what made up fantasy land do you live in then? Because I guarantee its not the truth. Sweden? There are no socialist nations in Europe, so where exactly are you talking about?

You have no idea what socialism is, thats obvious. Go ask the people of Eastern Europe what actual socialism leads to. Go ask people living in 1970's England what socialism was like when given free reign.

I believe Margaret Thatcher got it right about socialism:

'The thing with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money'.

As for the thread, Romney is still going to win. Not that he will be much better than Obama as they are controlled by the same masters and America will still have the same problems, but just to see the complete liberal meltdown from the American left wing media and the likes of Chris Matthews and Rachel madcow is going to be utterly hilarious. I will be watching MSNBC on election night.

I mean, look at the way the liberals are already acting in this thread over every new poll that comes out :lol And even those polls which show Romney leading are being weighted on 2008 numbers, and there is no way in hell that the same number of blacks, hispanics and young graduates are going to come out and vote this time around, so he is likely leading by far higher margins.

Democrats are placing all their bets on the electorate being the same as it was in 2008, it isnt going to be. All the people who voted for him in 2008 are coming out in lesser numbers this time around.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/10/29/Gallup-Shock-Romney-Up-7-with-early-voters

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Govern...22-point-drop-in-obama-early-voting-advantage

i'm telling you, i'm not a fan of either man really, but you liberals seriously need to start understanding that Obama is not liked anywhere near the amount that you seem to think he is, he is going to lose next week, its happening.

America simply cannot stand 4 more years of Obama being given a free reign to do whatever he likes, so it looks like Romney is the only other option, at this point anything and anybody other than Obama is good.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

Cliffy Byro said:


> God if they actually put Romney in office...
> 
> 
> It's like they enjoy being a laughing stock to the rest of planet earth.





Evil Neville said:


> Romney is a laughing stock to us because he's anti-socialism, personal freedoms, sex equality, ecology, secularism, etc. To me personally, he's like a bad throwback to some shitty times 60 and more years ago. Good thing loony sociopaths like that are quickly marginalized and laughed off their soapboxes around here.


I find it embarrassing when people comment on American politics when they have clearly just read, listened and then believed everything they have heard in the non-American press about Romney. You realise there is a reason Obama isn't loved in America anything like he is outside the states right? Because those in the states feel and know what is happening, those outside the states just get the smily happy pictures of Obama on their screens and newspapers, and buy into it. It is not reality.

The European press in particular absolutely adores Obama, do you really think you are getting anything like a clear picture of either man?

I would suggest its more a 'laughing stock' putting somebody in charge of the country who was in no way qualified to even nominate himself for the presidency, let alone run the worlds largest superpower.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Honestly it's like Americans saying the UK should appoint the leaders WE like. 

Why on Earth would they listen? Why on Earth should we?


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

King_Of_This_World said:


> And what made up fantasy land do you live in then? Because I guarantee its not the truth. Sweden? There are no socialist nations in Europe, so where exactly are you talking about?
> 
> You have no idea what socialism is, thats obvious. Go ask the people of Eastern Europe what actual socialism leads to. Go ask people living in 1970's England what socialism was like when given free reign.


:lmao Just wow. Educate yourself kid, even if it's just for the internet arguments, because you're really doing no favor to the stereotype. Don't live in a bubble that your unfortunate culture trapped you in.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> Honestly it's like Americans saying the UK should appoint the leaders WE like.
> 
> Why on Earth would they listen? Why on Earth should we?


The EU is doing a p. awful job at the moment. We'd be fools to base anything we do after them, or to even listen to their advice.

If anything, we should listen to people like Ludwig Von Mises, Murry N. Rothbard, and RON PAUL.


----------



## Hamada (Aug 17, 2008)

Interesting fact about the European Union. It's "anthem" (Ode to Joy) was once the national anthem of Rhodesia.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> The EU is doing a p. awful job at the moment. We'd be fools to base anything we do after them, or to even listen to their advice.
> 
> If anything, we should listen to people like Ludwig Von Mises, Murry N. Rothbard, and RON PAUL.


With the exception of Ron Paul, aren't you supposed to be anti-left wing/anti-liberal? Because von Mises and Rothbard were far left/anarchists and very much liberal.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Classical Liberals and Modern Day Liberals (aka: scum) are p. different.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Classical Liberals and Modern Day Liberals (aka: scum) are p. different.


You're confusing liberalism with left-center here. Political spectrums in USA are so confusing.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I'm not confusing anything, at least in regards to political ideologies in the United States and since I'm American, that is the political spectrum I'm referring to.

In America, Classical Liberals are totally different from Modern Liberals. Mises and Rothbard would spit on Obama.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> I'm not confusing anything, at least in regards to political ideologies in the United States and since I'm American, that is the political spectrum I'm referring to.
> 
> In America, Classical Liberals are totally different from Modern Liberals. Mises and Rothbard would spit on Obama.


Yeah, i've noticed that being in favor of bigger goverment control in USA means you're a liberal, which makes absoulutely no sense. This is how it's around here:

LEFT (liberal):

- social programs
- welfare state
- less goverment control
- fair wages
- secularism
- personal freedoms
- freedom of speech
- less police power
- decentralization of management of goods, money, influences, etc.
- direct democracy
- rule by people via referendums
- anti-lobbyist
- anti-corporationism
- pro-education and science
- ecology
- solidarity
- anti-globalism
- lower taxes
- self management of factory workers
- sindicalism

RIGHT (conservative):

- more goverment power
- centralization
- higher taxes
- anti-direct democracy
- traditionalism
- more police power
- less personal freedoms
- nationalism
- nore authoritarian relationship between employer and the employ (anti-self management)


----------



## kregnaz (Apr 1, 2012)

King_Of_This_World said:


> Evil Neville said:
> 
> 
> > Well, i'll speak for my country. There are a couple of nice things like complete social security, no poverty, very high education level, high standards of living and GDP per capita, very low number of crimes, direct democracy (the closest thing to anarchism you can find in the world today), personal freedoms, general happiness of the population, very liberal views towards matters of ethnicity, nationality, religion, freedom of speech, beautifuly perserved enviroment, high end infrastructure, etc.
> ...


Sounds like Switzerland to me /the direct democracy part) or Norway/Finland/Denmark/Germany/Austria/and basically half of Europe (cept the anarchy/ddemocracy thing)



King_Of_This_World said:


> You have no idea what socialism is, thats obvious. Go ask the people of Eastern Europe what actual socialism leads to. Go ask people living in 1970's England what socialism was like when given free reign.


If you refer to Ussr, you obviously have no idea either about socialism



King_Of_This_World said:


> I believe Margaret Thatcher got it right about socialism:
> 
> 'The thing with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money'.


And from here on the right wing bullshit starts to get from absurd to delusional. Btw, Thatcher didn't ruin Great Britain with HER money either, republicans/conservatives/rightwings, whatever you wanna call them reeeeeeeaaaaaally love other peoples money


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

kregnaz said:


> Sounds like Switzerland to me /the direct democracy part) or Norway/Finland/Denmark/Germany/Austria/and basically half of Europe (cept the anarchy/ddemocracy thing)


Yeah, minus the direct democracy it could be Finland, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Sweden, Liechtenstein, Austria, Netherland, Belgium, Iceland, Monaco or Andora.

But i'm swiss


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

Joss Whedon on Romney: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6TiXUF9xbTo


----------



## kregnaz (Apr 1, 2012)

Evil Neville said:


> Yeah, minus the direct democracy it could be Finland, Norway, Denmark, Luxembourg, Sweden, Liechtenstein, Austria, Netherland, Belgium, Iceland, Monaco or Andora.
> 
> But i'm swiss


Wahr irgendwie klar, grüazi Nachbar 
Soooo, I'm confused, if we look at King_Of_This_World's post we can safely assume, that Switzerland is obviously supah socialist commie evil leftwingliberal bad. On the other hand, it's more or less the world's largest "bank" as well, the epicentre of financial conservativism. How does that fit together? Either a) outside of the US dualistic approach on politics there are more shades of grey in politics/socio-economics and King_of_This_World is rather King_of_his_narrow_view_on_the_World_ignoring_everything_he/she_doesn't_know_or_want_to_accept or b) King_Of_This_World is absolutely right, there are only the nice people and the socialist and we and about 90% of the world are just making things up to fool dem americans. :hmm:


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Chris Christie *(R)* who spoke at the 2012 Republican National Convention SAID : "President Obama deserves great credit"


----------



## Superior Quality (Jul 30, 2012)

I read one of those magazines today, not sure which one, but at the top it said Obama's wife will devorce him if he loses the election. Not thay I believe it but that's some fucked up shit if it's true.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

9QA using a tragedy as an opportunity to make his idol look good. :kobe


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

CamillePunk said:


> 9QA using a tragedy as an opportunity to make his idol look good. :kobe


Cause that never happens on the other side.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

anyone who votes for obama based on his response to a storm is a fucking retard.


----------



## WWCturbo (Jun 21, 2012)

Ziggler Mark said:


> anyone who votes for obama based on his response to a storm is a fucking retard.


True that.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

King_Of_This_World said:


> I find it embarrassing when people comment on American politics when they have clearly just read, listened and then believed everything they have heard in the non-American press about Romney. You realise there is a reason Obama isn't loved in America anything like he is outside the states right? Because those in the states feel and know what is happening, those outside the states just get the smily happy pictures of Obama on their screens and newspapers, and buy into it. It is not reality.
> 
> The European press in particular absolutely adores Obama, do you really think you are getting anything like a clear picture of either man?
> 
> I would suggest its more a 'laughing stock' putting somebody in charge of the country who was in no way qualified to even nominate himself for the presidency, let alone run the worlds largest superpower.


Which Country do you live in again ?

I swear it changes every 5 seconds.


----------



## Rboogy (Jul 30, 2012)

OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA continuing to refuse to talk about the issues I see.


----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)

Next week, most of us are going to make a choice on if Barack Obama is worthy of keeping his job as The President of The United States of America against his opponent who changes his positions faster than the weather. A fair assessment from a registered Republican who has voted Democratic in the past.


*PROS*:

- Auto Industry Bailout. (On a moral level, it was the right thing to do. All this when Mitt Romney wanted Detroit go bankrupt.)

- Passing the New START Treaty (which reduces nuclear arms in the the US and Russia by 1/3).

- Repealed "Don't Ask Don't Tell".

- Passed Student Loan Reform. (because of him, it was easier for me to go back to school which got me my current job.)

- Dismantled Al-Qaeda in Pakistan & Afghanistan to the point of near-extinction.

- Allowed federal funding for stem cell research. (Best thing he ever did!)

- Brought the troops back home from Iraq.

- Prevented mass killing fields in Libya and got rid of Muammar Gadhafi, without losing a single American life or committing us to another decade long war.

- Passed modest Wall Street Reform in Dodd-Frank that at least puts derivatives in clearinghouses and created the Consumer Protection Agency.

- Stabilized the economy with the stimulus package.

- Gave the order to take out Bin Laden. (Did this in his first term where Clinton and Bush Jr. failed in both of theirs!)

- Repaired America's image to the world

- Millions of Americans will now soon be insured and ended pre-existing conditions. Obamacare isn't perfect, but its better than nothing.


*CONS*:


- Current $16 trillion debt (Keep in mind, it was $10 trillion BEFORE Obama took office!)

- Likes to use Executive Order a lot. (although his predecessor was guilty of doing this as well.)

- $4 per gallon for gasoline.

- Record trade deficit.

- Record housing foreclosure.

- Record number of people on food stamps.

- The U.S.A. lost its credit rating.

- Fast and Furious scandal.

- Stopped the Keystone pipeline.

- Gave half a billion tax payer’s dollars to Solyndra.

- Borrowed money from China.

- Filed lawsuit against Arizona for enforcing immigration laws.

- Cancelled NASA's Space Shuttle Program.

- Guantanamo Bay is still open.


*IN THE MIDDLE*:

- He also supports gay marriage.

- He extended the Bush tax cuts.


Personally, I'm better off than I was 4 years ago so I'll give him a second chance because I believe in the old saying "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't." Just go out and vote. Its your right as an American citizen so use it! And even if you think your vote won't matter, I remind you that you can still vote out of principle. 

- Vic


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Obama doesn't get credit for Iraq, since it was on Bush's time table and he wanted to extend the troops' stay in Iraq, but the Iraqi government wouldn't allow it. Also, al Qaeda is hardly extinct.

As for the cons, you forgot the drone strikes, NDAA, extending the Patriot Act, and the fact that he is sanctioning to drones to be over our skies by the year 2014 (I think, might be off on the year). Oh, and his handling and lying about BENGHAZI.

Tbh, this election is lose-lose for people like Brother CP and I. I just hope GARY gets 5% of the vote.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

Vic Capri said:


> *PROS*:
> 
> - Auto Industry Bailout. (On a moral level, it was the right thing to do. All this when Mitt Romney wanted Detroit go bankrupt.)


And what would be the downfall of it? Detroit is a shit hole and their own police force urges people not to visit in lieu of the "war-like" conditions. All Obama did was what Romney planned to do: forced a managed bankruptcy of Chrysler and GM. 



> - Repealed "Don't Ask Don't Tell".


During a massive Troop drawdown in which all branches of the armed forces are putting Service Members out at a record pace through forced retirement, medical discharges, and bad conduct discharges.



> - Dismantled Al-Qaeda in Pakistan & Afghanistan to the point of near-extinction.


Uh, what? I don't even know how to respond to this. Just know that 2/3 of the military deaths in Afghanistan have occurred during the Obama administration. Unfortunately, Al Qaeda is still alive and well in the Middle East.



> - Brought the troops back home from Iraq.


There are still Troops in Iraq. He gets no credit for this, seeing that he may be leaving double the Troops in Afghanistan compared to when he took office should he lose the election next week.



> - Gave the order to take out Bin Laden. (Did this in his first term where Clinton and Bush Jr. failed in both of theirs!)


All the while outing military raid secrets and classified tactical vehicles like the SOAR helicopter, so much so that special operations veterans have chided him for failing OPSEC to the umpteenth degree. This is some shit that you won't find in a downloadable Army Ranger Handbook .pdf.



> - Millions of Americans will now soon be insured and ended pre-existing conditions. Obamacare isn't perfect, but its better than nothing.


Really? Because I'm paying more for my insurance with less coverage due to insurance companies being told what they can and cannot cover, which is practically an effort to force people to buy the government insurance.



> *CONS*:
> 
> - Current $16 trillion debt (Keep in mind, it was $10 trillion BEFORE Obama took office!)


Bush added 4.9 trillion in 8 years. Obama added 4.7 trillion in 4. fpalm



> - Record number of people on food stamps.


But they get free Obama phone because Romney sucks. 



> - Fast and Furious scandal.


+++ Benghazi scandal.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Vic Capri said:


> *IN THE MIDDLE*:
> 
> *- He also supports gay marriage.*
> 
> - He extended the Bush tax cuts.


Out of all of the problems in this country, the gay marriage issue isn't even worth stressing over.



Glass Shatters said:


> But they get free Obama phone because Romney sucks.


So people are going to use these extreme examples of ignorant people to complain about their tax money giving people some benefits. Based on the trillions of dollars at our disposal, this won't cause much of a dent.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

CamillePunk said:


> Obama is the most anti-personal freedoms president in our history. Extended the patriot act, signed the NDAA, and is bringing drones to our own local neighborhoods.
> 
> *Also interesting the media and other countries' leaders don't seem to want to discuss the illegal drone strikes against countries we never declared war on.* George Bush violates international law and he's a war criminal. Obama does it and people in other countries are begging us to re-elect him. What?


Simple. Nobody cares about those countries. Especially now that they are using drones without risking american lives. Its just a bunch of people living out in the sand somewhere. If it doesnt affect ones country, the majority will not care.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> So people are going to use these extreme examples of ignorant people to complain about their tax money giving people some benefits. Based on the trillions of dollars at our disposal, this won't cause much of a dent.


No, I put it there because this ignorant person in question specifically stated that if you are on food stamps, you can get a free phone. Ask yourself: WHAT IS OBAMA DOING TO URGE PEOPLE TO GET OFF OF GOVERNMENT FOOD STAMPS WHEN HE IS GIVING THEM *MORE* BENEFITS FOR BEING ON FOOD STAMPS? 

There is a reason there are more people on them than ever.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Glass Shatters said:


> No, I put it there because this ignorant person in question specifically stated that if you are on food stamps, you can get a free phone. Ask yourself: WHAT IS OBAMA DOING TO URGE PEOPLE TO GET OFF OF GOVERNMENT FOOD STAMPS WHEN HE IS GIVING THEM *MORE* BENEFITS FOR BEING ON FOOD STAMPS?
> 
> There is a reason there are more people on them than ever.


No one WANTS to be on food stamps. There will always be a subset of the population that stays on food stamps because they are content with barely making it. I guarantee that many of the people on food stamps now are working to get out of it. Why should Obama have to encourage people that being poor is shameful when everyone already knows that? He can't change the ignorant people who are content with living in the projects. Those people won't change and you shouldn't expect him to change them.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

wouldn't kill him to stop the incentives.

new addition to the bill of rights: right to a PHONE.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

So a basic average quality cellphone is an incentive that will make people want to become poor and get on food stamps? lol.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

So, the two party system ends if Johnson gets 5%? Hard to believe.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

kobra860 said:


> So a basic average quality cellphone is an incentive that will make people want to become poor and get on food stamps? lol.


Still defending giving out free cell phones I see. Give me a reason why this is a good idea.



Huganomics said:


> So, the two party system ends if Johnson gets 5%? Hard to believe.


It won't end, but it would help establish the Libertarian party. Perhaps Brother CP knows more about this, but I think 5% gets you federal funding or what not for the next election or what not.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> No one WANTS to be on food stamps.





> There will always be a subset of the population that stays on food stamps because they are content with barely making it.



The second statement completely contradicts the first.



> I guarantee that many of the people on food stamps now are working to get out of it.


You are not understanding what I'm trying to get across. Food stamps are not a *huge* problem, but the consistent increasing of government benefits for those who already receive government benefits is a tad ridiculous. If I got more shit for free while I was already receiving shit for free, what incentive would I have to stop receiving government assistance? None.



> Why should Obama have to encourage people that being poor is shameful when everyone already knows that?


Why should he continue giving them benefits at the behest of taxpaying citizens in light of already in place increases in government assistance? Surely you're not arguing that most people conduct themselves with a degree of pride and morals and would do the right thing if they were given the choice, are you?



> He can't change the ignorant people who are content with living in the projects. Those people won't change and you shouldn't expect him to change them.


Who said anything about projects? What are you even talking about?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Glass Shatters said:


> The second statement completely contradicts the first.


When I say "no one", I'm talking about the average person. I couldn't generalize and say that no one ever wants to be on food stamps because there are always exceptions. 




> You are not understanding what I'm trying to get across. Food stamps are not a *huge* problem,


But yet you're still complaining about them.



> but the consistent increasing of government benefits for those who already receive government benefits is a tad ridiculous. If I got more shit for free while I was already receiving shit for free, what incentive would I have to stop receiving government assistance? None.


For the people out there who think that they can't do any better, those people will be content with getting free stuff for nothing. Most people aren't content with getting the bare minimum from the government. 



> Why should he continue giving them benefits at the behest of taxpaying citizens in light of already in place increases in government assistance? Surely you're not arguing that most people conduct themselves with a degree of pride and morals and would do the right thing if they were given the choice, are you?


Our tax money goes into a lot of stuff that most people wouldn't like. Benefits for illegal immigrants is one obvious example. 




> Who said anything about projects? What are you even talking about?


We know where this discussion was heading when you posted the Obama phone video clip. Don't act naive.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> When I say "no one", I'm talking about the average person. I couldn't generalize and say that no one ever wants to be on food stamps because there are always exceptions.


Oh, okay. Thanks for clearing up what you couldn't clear up and still can't clear up because there are always exceptions as to why you can't generalize but...(cont. on 3rd quote)



> But yet you're still complaining about them.


Start comprehending. Seriously. I didn't say they were not a problem, I said they weren't a huge problem. I'm complaining about them because it IS A PROBLEM that more people are on them than ever.



> For the people out there who think that they can't do any better, those people will be content with getting free stuff for nothing. Most people aren't content with getting the bare minimum from the government.


(cont. from 1st quote)...you are more than happy to generalize here when you're trying to prove a point.



> Our tax money goes into a lot of stuff that most people wouldn't like. Benefits for illegal immigrants is one obvious example.


Stop dancing around the subject and address the points made directly. Throwing out different examples that have nothing to do with increasing benefits for legalized citizens who leech off of the government is doing nothing for you. Answer my question: What incentive is there for people to stop receiving government assistance if they continue to receive new government assistance? As a matter of fact, since you want to try analogies, what incentive is there for illegal citizens to stop receiving government assistance if they continue to receive it? 



> We know where this discussion was heading when you posted the Obama phone video clip. Don't act naive.


I don't get it.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Glass Shatters said:


> (cont. from 1st quote)...you are more than happy to generalize here when you're trying to prove a point.


I didn't generalize at all. It's a fact that most people out here aren't content with getting the bare minimum from the government. 




> Stop dancing around the subject and address the points made directly. Throwing out different examples that have nothing to do with increasing benefits for legalized citizens who leech off of the government is doing nothing for you. Answer my question: What incentive is there for people to stop receiving government assistance if they continue to receive new government assistance? As a matter of fact, since you want to try analogies, what incentive is there for illegal citizens to stop receiving government assistance if they continue to receive it? Same damn thing.


You keep overlooking the fact that many of the people receiving benefits are trying to move beyond them. It doesn't matter if the government gives out a basic cellphone. That won't be enough to change someone's mind. I've already addressed the exception to the rule where a portion of the population just wants to leech off the government. If you can prove that most people are content with getting the bare minimum from the government then you'll have an argument. When the government increases the benefits for people on food stamps, it still won't be enough to make a significant economic upgrade.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> I didn't generalize at all. It's a fact that most people out here aren't content with getting the bare minimum from the government.


You just generalized again. "Most people"..."known fact"...

You're right, they're not happy with the minimum. They want more from the government.



> You keep overlooking the fact that many of the people receiving benefits are trying to move beyond them.


Because you continue to overlook citing any type of source whatsoever and instead insist people take you on your uncredited word.



> It doesn't matter if the government gives out a basic cellphone.


It does when taxpayers are footing the bill. 



> If you can prove that most people are content with getting the bare minimum from the government then you'll have an argument. When the government increases the benefits for people on food stamps, it still won't be enough to make a significant economic upgrade.


I don't need any proof. I'm not saying that most people are satisfied. You are the only one throwing out statements like "known fact" followed by your own personal opinion. 

The only proof that I need is that more people are receiving government assistance via food stamps and disability than ever before. Maybe it's just Obama's bad luck that more people got hurt and can't afford food more so than any other President in history. That's it. He's just got bad luck.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Glass Shatters said:


> You just generalized again. "Most people"..."known fact"...


It's common knowledge. Most people don't want to live at the bare minimum. Generalizing is when people say "all" or don't leave room for exceptions. "Most people" leaves room for exceptions.



> You're right, they're not happy with the minimum. They want more from the government.


And the government won't give more than the minimum. People on food stamps aren't going to be driving in Ferraris or fly in first class seats. 



> Because you continue to overlook citing any type of source whatsoever and instead insist people take you on your uncredited word. I don't need any proof. I'm not saying that most people are satisfied. You are the only one throwing out statements like "known fact" followed by your own personal opinion.


Why should I have to prove something that is common sense? Just look at the number of people on food stamps compared to the entire US population. Do you honestly think that a large percentage of the US population wants to live barely above the poverty line?




> The only proof that I need is that more people are receiving government assistance via food stamps and disability than ever before.


Why are you talking about disability now? People can't control that. In fact, this discussion was about food stamps so this is coming out of nowhere.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> 9QA using a tragedy as an opportunity to make his idol look good. :kobe


I think the event made Obama look good.Your talking about a Republican who 
spoke at the Republican National Convention this year. Its not as if Chris Christie did not come out of this looking good to he did and i am think about him if he ever runs President , i am a big fan of a Republican who can work with Democrats.





Ziggler Mark said:


> anyone who votes for obama based on his response to a storm is a fucking retard.



how so all points show class in Obama and Chris Christie doing whats right in a time of need. thats what we are looking for in a President.the New Jersey governor displayed the confrontation-loving, hard-charging style that has made him a rising national figure.

"I don't give a damn about Election Day," Christie told a news conference on Tuesday in Ewing, New Jersey, 64 miles southwest of New York City. "Let the politicians who are on the ballot worry about Election Day. It's not my problem."


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

How did the event make Obama look "good?" I still feel the same way about him today than I did before the hurricane. He did what he was supposed to do in that situation.

We shouldn't commend a President for doing what he is supposed to do.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Gallup.com -- A majority of Americans continue to believe that Democratic President Barack Obama will win re-election Tuesday over Republican challenger Mitt Romney, by 54% to 34%. These views are roughly similar to where they were in May and August, although slightly more Americans now do not have an opinion either way.

---

cnn - In Nevada, more Democrats have cast their ballots already.As of now, Democrats have an edge in the state, with 215,754 turning out their vote, compared to 181,278 Republicans. About 86,840 voters with a different party affiliation have also voted.


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

9QA said:


> Gallup.com -- A majority of Americans continue to believe that Democratic President Barack Obama will win re-election Tuesday over Republican challenger Mitt Romney, by 54% to 34%. These views are roughly similar to where they were in May and August, although slightly more Americans now do not have an opinion either way.


Because that is preciously what they've been told by the liberal dominated media in America, which is a very blatant tactic to making people not bother voting Republican as 'it wont make any difference', as they are being told everyday that Obama is a lock-in for re-election.

A very old media trick, get with it son. 

Talking of the liberal dominated media, I find it hilarious how much the left hate the *one *right-wing conservative news station in Fox, yet completely ignore incredible bias and complete idiocy from the liberal media like this clip:

MSNBC Ridicules Romney for Collecting Food and Supplies for Sandy Victims, absolutely incredible and the worse part is, they are entirely serious.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...food-and-supplies-sandy-victims#ixzz2AtqTy3pV

Obama is 'acting like a president and Romney is acting like somebody who wants to be president' is quite possibly the most idiotic line I've ever heard.

Can you imagine the outrage from the left if Fox ran something like this if the roles were reversed? 

As I've said, the main reason i want Romney to win is to see the reaction from the liberal dominated media, can you already see the excuse they are preparing if Obama loses? Its the same old trick:

'Racism'

You can be 100% sure thats what they will go with. It will be 'racist whiteys' fault, guarantee it. They will ignore the 80% of minorities voting Democrat, of course, including the 97% of blacks. It will be 'whiteys racism' that cost him re-election.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)




----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> It's common knowledge. Most people don't want to live at the bare minimum. Generalizing is when people say "all" or don't leave room for exceptions. "Most people" leaves room for exceptions.


Not wanting to does not mean that they are not happy doing nothing and still getting paid. Who wouldn't want to live in a house worth $200k? How many of those people do what it takes to get a job that can make them afford a house worth $200k? 



> And the government won't give more than the minimum. People on food stamps aren't going to be driving in Ferraris or fly in first class seats.


I don't see how a cell phone is the "minimum". You don't need a cell phone to live. 

To the second point, I actually read a story about a stripper who was receiving food stamps and owned a nice "pimped out" Dodge Charger. With a custom paint job of pink, of course. 



> Why should I have to prove something that is common sense? Just look at the number of people on food stamps compared to the entire US population. Do you honestly think that a large percentage of the US population wants to live barely above the poverty line?


Answer my questions instead of presenting new ones that have nothing to do with the fact that more people are on food stamps than ever and nothing is being done to deter people from getting food stamps, adding more unnecessary debt. 



> Why are you talking about disability now? People can't control that. In fact, this discussion was about food stamps so this is coming out of nowhere.


Pretty much like your "project" statement. The discussion was about government assistance. I think I made that pretty clear from my post history. 



Glass Shatters said:


> Answer my question: What incentive is there for people to stop receiving *government assistance* if they continue to receive new *government assistance*?


Food stamps is what spurred the conversation on government assistance.



GOON The Legend said:


> How did the event make Obama look "good?" I still feel the same way about him today than I did before the hurricane. He did what he was supposed to do in that situation.
> 
> We shouldn't commend a President for doing what he is supposed to do.


Bush flying over New Orleans after Katrina = photo op.

Obama flying over a hurricane site = hope and change.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

What truly pisses me off is that both parties are so stubborn that neither will work together regardless of who wins. If our nations would just work together and make sensible compromises, we wouldn't have half of the problems that affect us today. All we have heard for the last 4 years was one party blame the other, pointing the fingers at each other when we should have made some real change. This country will never change when all they do is strive for power and money. I'm afraid we will collapse before we truly realized that our country is dying.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Still defending giving out free cell phones I see. Give me a reason why this is a good idea.


Well if you think about it, people with little money are generally more likely to be involved in violent crime which could result in injuries and possibly the need of emergency services, a mobile phone would make it quicker and more convenient increasing survival chances.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of people would rather be working than on benefits.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

kregnaz said:


> Wahr irgendwie klar, grüazi Nachbar
> Soooo, I'm confused, if we look at King_Of_This_World's post we can safely assume, that Switzerland is obviously supah socialist commie evil leftwingliberal bad. On the other hand, it's more or less the world's largest "bank" as well, the epicentre of financial conservativism. How does that fit together? Either a) outside of the US dualistic approach on politics there are more shades of grey in politics/socio-economics and King_of_This_World is rather King_of_his_narrow_view_on_the_World_ignoring_everything_he/she_doesn't_know_or_want_to_accept or b) King_Of_This_World is absolutely right, there are only the nice people and the socialist and we and about 90% of the world are just making things up to fool dem americans. :hmm:


Must be the latter neighbor, must be the latter bama


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Karma101 said:


> At the end of the day, the vast majority of people would rather be working than on benefits.


Which is what I've been saying all along.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> Which is what I've been saying all along.


Well done to you.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama planned to tours New Jersey with Republican Gov. Chris Christie, who has praised the president's response to the disaster.

Before heading to New Jersey, the president visited the Federal Emergency Management Agency to meet with officials. 

On Tuesday, Obama stopped by the American Red Cross and also held a conference call with governors and mayors in affected states, promising immediate and efficient help for the most critical needs.

"This is a tough time for millions of folks across the Eastern Seaboard, but America is tougher and we are tougher because we pull together, we don't leave anybody behind (*as in the 47*), we make sure that we respond as a nation," Obama said.

The president and Christie and both used nearly identical language in saying their concern was on disaster relief rather than next Tuesday's election.

On Tuesday, *Christie praised Obama as "outstanding" and "incredibly supportive"* in responding to Sandy.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

WHAT A GREAT, GREAT MAN HE IS.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

What a risky decision made by our GREAT PRESIDENT there. It's not like delaying aid to the victims of Sandy would have cost him the election or anything......

Not saying he made this decision because of the election, but to commend him for doing what is expected of him is a bit much.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1176


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> WHAT A GREAT, GREAT MAN HE IS.


At least it's easier to believe that democrats actually care when a lot of republicans probably don't.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Karma101 said:


> At least it's easier to believe that democrats actually care when a lot of republicans probably don't.


By their voting records, there are about three politicians in Washington who care about the American people, and two of them are from the same family.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

UK's bbc poll


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

thats not a graph, there arent even any numbers

it looks like something my cousin would draw, and shes 3


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

9QA is a fairly good artist.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

am i the only person confused as to why the symbol for the democrats is a donkey?


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Cause they are asses?


----------



## Arcade (Jun 9, 2010)

Redead said:


> am i the only person confused as to why the symbol for the democrats is a donkey?


When Andrew Jackson was running for president, he was often called a "jackass" which led to the donkey being the symbol of the Democrats.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Redead said:


> thats not a graph, there arent even any numbers
> 
> it looks like something my cousin would draw, and shes 3





GOON The Legend said:


> 9QA is a fairly good artist.


wow yall are not so smart 

this is the pic url wow !
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/63112000/gif/_63112413_whitehouse_promo_lg2.gif

Obama up in OH. , VA. and now FL !!!!


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

you know, i almost wanna see romney to win just to see your reaction

calling me and goon dumb?

men in glass houses 9qa, men in glass houses


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

your both trolls. and you are arab and not even american so why keep posting here?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

im out to destroy your country and spying on you here was the logical place to start

i also take pride in the fact that i know quite a lot more than most yanks do about their own country. i find that rather amusing

now, if you continue to discriminate against me i'll have no choice but to report you


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

yeah but you dont know shit tho.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Redead said:


> im out to destroy your country and spying on you here was the logical place to start


Is your country one of the places OBAMA is committing war crimes against?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

MethHardy said:


> yeah but you dont know shit tho.


i beg to disagree son

english is my second language and it appears ive already grasped it better than you

now go eat a cheeseburger with extra large fries and then sue the company that made it, or whatever it is your people are fond of doing


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

"You're trolls because I disagree with you"- Meth Hardy

Also, did 9QA really call Redead and I dumb? 9QA doesn't have an original thought in his body :kobe


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

> Researchers are now finding that for an increasing number of Americans, the idea of a Black man as commander in chief of the United States is unacceptable, and that could cost President Obama the presidency if minority, women and young voters don’t turn out on Election Day, experts said.
> 
> “I guess it shows you the underlying tenacity and strength of racism in America,” said Robert Smith, a political analyst who teaches at San Francisco State University.
> 
> ...


LOL haters.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Thread is degenerating. Less telling people where they can post, calling them not so smart, and more discussion about this election.

OBAMA




Redead said:


> am i the only person confused as to why the symbol for the democrats is a donkey?


The Jackson stuff is right, but a cartoonist whose name I can't remember pretty much cemented the symbol by using the donkey in his political illustrations. I wanna say he came up with the Republican elephant too.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

It doesn't help that one of the most active posters here is a constantly changing gimmick poster.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

But a jackass isnt exactly the best symbol

especially since by definition, it a contradiction. arent the dems in theory supposed to be the more progressive party? a jackass is stereotyped as stubborn. conservatives can be seen as focused on an old mindset, old fashioned conservative values. so a jackass might be more appropriate


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Redead said:


> But a jackass isnt exactly the best symbol
> 
> especially since by definition, it a contradiction. arent the dems in theory supposed to be the more progressive party? a jackass is stereotyped as stubborn


The Democrats during the Andrew Jackson era were completely different from the Democrats of today. Back then, the Republicans were the progressive party but then in the middle of the 20th century the roles began to switch.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

kobra860 said:


> It doesn't help that one of the most active posters here is a constantly changing gimmick poster.


I've been saying the same thing constantly for the last 35 pages. Only thing that changes is my avatar and sig. Nice try, son.

I'm starting to think that Romney might just end up winning this election. The enthusiasm among Democrats is lower than it was in 2008, and Obama's favor ability ratings among all groups are down from then as well. Then you you must factor in that Obama has lost some of the people who voted for him back in 2008, and he isn't going to gain any McCain voters from 2008 either.

Not to mention that Republicans are going to turn out on droves to vote Obama out, and the Independent voters are flocking towards Romney in droves as well.

If Obama loses the Independent vote by 15-20% like the polls are saying, I can't see how he wins the election.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

kobra860 said:


> It doesn't help that one of the most active posters here is a constantly changing gimmick poster.


Nah it's ok. His gimmick is satire, and political satire is a good thing.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Wouldn't shock me if Romney wins Pennsylvania. Found this post on a RON PAUL forum, and it was interesting.



> I have some contacts in the state and what I am hearing is that internal polling shows Obama down by 10+ points in most, if not all areas of PA with the exception of Philadelphia. In 08, Philadelphia went 83% for Obama (595,000 votes). The key to Obama holding PA is going to be turnout in Philadelphia, which requires a lot of door to door work on election day by the Dem machine. GOTV is very much a hands-on process in inner city Philly. Essentially, Obama needs to come close to matching his 2008 vote total in Philly for the math to work in his favor. If say his turnout is reduced and he pulls 500,000 votes out of the city it is likely that he will lose the state. Now, as we know, the enthusiasm for Obama is not what it was in 08. So if the precinct captains walk a little slower, take more breaks, stop and chat with people longer, etc - any distractions will reduce their effectiveness and hurt Obama's chances.


FWIW the Ron Paul guys want Obama to win so Rand Paul can run in 2016, so I doubt they would lie about this.

ALSO- http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204846304578090820229096046.html



> In addition to the data, the anecdotal and intangible evidence—from crowd sizes to each side's closing arguments—give the sense that the odds favor Mr. Romney. They do. My prediction: Sometime after the cock crows on the morning of Nov. 7, Mitt Romney will be declared America's 45th president. Let's call it 51%-48%, with Mr. Romney carrying at least 279 Electoral College votes, probably more.


Karl Rove, unlike DICK MORRIS, is better at predicting elections, and even predicted Obama's landslide victory, while MORRIS said McCain had a chance the day before. This article basically confirms what I posted earlier in the sense that less Democrats will show up than they did in 2008, and every aspect that led to Obama's victory is down by a significant margin.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Yeah Democrats usually have to win the cities in the east and midwest to take those states. The rural areas are usually Republicans. Pretty sure it's the same way in Ohio. He needs massive turnout in places like Cleveland and Columbus.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Yeah, Obama basically needs the same exact number to vote for him in Philadelphia on Tuesday that voted for him in 2008, and I doubt that happens since across the board the enthusiasm for Obama is down. Plus, the polls have been saying for months that Pennsylvania is "likely Obama" so they might just stay home.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Axelrod will shave his mustache is they lose Penn. What a sacrifice. Way to take a stand and believe what you say.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Found this comment funny in the comment section of that WSJ article I posted.



> ANGER: Mitt Romney is a woman hating, baby seal clubbing, company killing Nazi vulture capitalist who wants nothing more than to give increased benefits to his billionaire friends while the middle class serfs row his yacht. No way anybody will vote for him. We've so got this in the bag.
> 
> DENIAL: There's no possible way Romney can win. Nate Silver and Intrade say so.
> 
> ...


Democrats currently going through the five stages of grieve.


----------



## dan the marino (Oct 22, 2006)

I think Obama still has a good shot at winning. It'll be close though (obviously) as the Republicans will be out in droves just to vote him out. Whatever happens it does look like Obama will take Ohio, at least from what I've seen.



MrMister said:


> Nah it's ok. His gimmick is satire, and political satire is a good thing.


I assume this was the same case with the Santorum support as well.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I don't think Ohio is safe for Obama, regardless of what the polls say. 



> Adrian Gray, who oversaw the Bush 2004 voter-contact operation and is now a policy analyst for a New York investment firm, makes the point that as of Tuesday, 530,813 Ohio Democrats had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot. That's down 181,275 from four years ago. But 448,357 Ohio Republicans had voted early or had requested or cast an absentee ballot, up 75,858 from the last presidential election.
> 
> That 257,133-vote swing almost wipes out Mr. Obama's 2008 Ohio victory margin of 262,224. Since most observers expect Republicans to win Election Day turnout, these early vote numbers point toward a Romney victory in Ohio. They are also evidence that Scott Jennings, my former White House colleague and now Romney Ohio campaign director, was accurate when he told me that the Buckeye GOP effort is larger than the massive Bush 2004 get-out-the-vote operation.


The real wildcard here is Pennsylvania, which I mentioned above. If the turnout is down in Philadelphia (which it will be), then Romney could take the state, which would change everything.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

MrMister said:


> Nah it's ok. His gimmick is satire, and political satire is a good thing.


I'm glad that he is now a registered troll, he can stop pretending he isn't now.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Karma101 said:


> I'm glad that he is now a registered troll, he can stop pretending he isn't now.


Do you even read my posts in this thread, or do you only look at my avatar and sig?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

i think its over Obama is going to win, i think.

50% of likely voters in Colorado support Obama, with 48% backing the former Massachusetts governor. 

come on FL ,OH ,VA , Colorado ......

I THINK IT MAY BE OVER Obama is wining all over but in most he is just one point up so i dont know if he will get all that he is wining in now but right now Obama has 347 and all he needs is 270 so if he wins in all the one he is set to win in he still wins. Romney has one hell of a fight!


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Nate Silver says Obama wins and he is usually right so I'm going with him.
Oh bama.
You came and you gave with out taking.
And you conquered our hearts.
Oh bama!!

GO OBama!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Polls don't account for apathy and/or enthusiasm.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

* New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote in a surprise endorsement Thursday he was voting for President Barack Obama in the upcoming presidential election*










Citing the storm, which left much of his city underwater and powerless, Bloomberg wrote in an op-ed on his website that "while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of [climate change], the risk that it might be – given this week's devastation – should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action."

Romney, Bloomberg wrote, is a "good and decent man" whose business experience would be a valuable asset in the White House, but his changes in positions have made the candidate a bad choice for president.

"In the past he has…taken sensible positions on immigration, illegal guns, abortion rights and health care. But he has reversed course on all of them, and is even running against the health-care model he signed into law in Massachusetts," Bloomberg, an independent who did not endorse a presidential candidate in 2008, wrote in his column.

"If the 1994 or 2003 version of Mitt Romney were running for president, I may well have voted for him because, like so many other independents, I have found the past four years to be, in a word, disappointing," the New York City mayor continued, pointing to what he regards as failures in Obama's jobs creation record and his approach to balancing the budget.

"Of course, neither candidate has specified what hard decisions he will make to get our economy back on track while also balancing the budget," Bloomberg concluded. "But in the end, what matters most isn't the shape of any particular proposal; it's the work that must be done to bring members of Congress together to achieve bipartisan solutions."

"If he listens to people on both sides of the aisle, and builds the trust of moderates, he can fulfill the hope he inspired four years ago and lead our country toward a better future for my children and yours. And that's why I will be voting for him," Bloomberg wrote.

In a statement, the president wrote he was "honored" to have secured Bloomberg's endorsement, saying "I deeply respect him for his leadership in business, philanthropy and government, and appreciate the extraordinary job he's doing right now, leading New York City through these difficult days."

"While we may not agree on every issue, Mayor Bloomberg and I agree on the most important issues of our time – that the key to a strong economy is investing in the skills and education of our people, that immigration reform is essential to an open and dynamic democracy, and that climate change is a threat to our children's future, and we owe it to them to do something about it," the president added.

In October, Bloomberg announced he was launching an "independent spending campaign" to moderate candidates in both parties during the final stretch of the election season.

The three-term mayor said he would spend eight figures on the campaign, billed as an effort to back candidates who "have shown a willingness to work in a bi-partisan fashion."

The expenditure represented Bloomberg's largest move yet to influence national races, and focused on candidates who want to crack down on illegal guns - an issue, like climate change, on which Bloomberg is highly vocal. Bloomberg has also made contributions to marriage equality referenda.

The mayor served his first two terms as a registered Republican, but ran for a third term as an independent.


----------



## DBizzle (Mar 14, 2010)

Republicans are the new fascists - don't vote for them. and climate change is real, motherfuckers ...


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

isnt bloomberg a liberal anyways?


----------



## A$AP (Jul 24, 2012)

Bloomberg is still the fucking man.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Redead said:


> isnt bloomberg a liberal anyways?


He's technically an Independent, but was a Democrat until 2001, then was a Republican for six years, and then an Independent. Plus, considering his policies, I'd say he's a pretty huge Liberal, so I don't see how his endorsements comes as a shock.

He's also def. scum.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/pollingcenter/polls/3319

Less than a week before Election Day, President Barack Obama holds a statistically significant lead over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the battleground of Iowa, while the two candidates are locked in tight races in New Hampshire and Wisconsin, according to new NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist polls.
In Iowa, Obama is ahead by six points among likely voters, 50 percent to 44 percent


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

[/IMG]


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

It looks over for Romney. http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1193


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Those polls really don't mean anything. It's all about likely voters, which Romney is leading, and voter enthusiasm, which the GOP has tons of.


----------



## HardKoR (May 19, 2009)

I voted for neither one. You can say I "threw away" my vote. I really don't think either one of them deserve my vote. Both parties are so hell bent on being polar opposites they are the reason nothing gets done in DC. What is really sad the few good politicians are being overshadowed by extremists from both sides.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Me too kid. Me too.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Do you even read my posts in this thread, or do you only look at my avatar and sig?


So do you actually have a reason for having Romney in your avatar and sig, or is it just there as bait?


----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)

Romney: 241 (wins Florida and Nevada) 

Obama: 297 (wins the rest of the swing states) 

- Vic


----------



## gohel50 (Oct 1, 2005)

Doesn't matter who wins, both are zionist pricks.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

well its your own damn fault

dont complain when shit goes wrong in your democracy


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Redead said:


> well its your own damn fault
> 
> dont complain when shit goes wrong in your democracy


You really don't know how things work here do you.

Or you're trolling.

If you're not trolling, look up IRON TRIANGLE. That's the United States. Yes, we're fucked.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

it was mostly tongue in cheek

but the zionist thing ticks me off.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Understandable. I can't stand it either and it doesn't even affect me directly.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

"There’s Never Been A Day In The Last Four Years That I’ve Been Proud To Be His Vice Presidnet"- Joe Biden

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/ano...ears-ive-been-proud-to-be-his-vice-president/

Freudian Slip imo. He knows the era of Romney is near, and he's trying to get into the good graces of Him.


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

GOON The Legend said:


> Those polls really don't mean anything. It's all about likely voters, which Romney is leading, and voter enthusiasm, which the GOP has tons of.


Yes! This helps me sleep at night too! The polls mean nothing and never have! (Y)

MITTENS GONNA SWEEP ALL THE SWING STATES. YEAWHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

we should vote mittens cause sandy made everything cold and we need our mittens

- (formerly) undecided voters


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

Sandy is an anagram for Obama. He did this to us. 

Mittens is our only hope. Our last hope.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

With four days to go until the presidential election, a new poll indicates the race for arguably the most important battleground state remains in the bag for Obama.

According to a CNN/ORC International survey released Friday, President Barack Obama holds a three point advantage over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the contest for Ohio's much fought over 18 electoral votes!!!!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Margin of error in that poll is 3.5

Hardly in the bag.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Margin of error in that poll is 3.5
> 
> Hardly in the bag.


lol your wishing


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I'm not wishing. The margin of error is 3.5. Do you even read the polls you're posting in this thread?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Food for thought, gentlemen.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

More analysis. http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1211


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

9QA said:


> With four days to go until the presidential election, a new poll indicates the race for arguably the most important battleground state remains in the bag for Obama.
> 
> According to a CNN/ORC International survey released Friday, President Barack Obama holds a three point advantage over Republican nominee Mitt Romney in the contest for Ohio's much fought over 18 electoral votes!!!!


Party ID: 35D/29R/36I...

Ohio will be anywhere from D+1 to R+1.5 in the electorate...so you're most likely down.


----------



## Glass Shatters (Jun 14, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> I'm not wishing. The margin of error is 3.5. Do you even read the polls you're posting in this thread?


You're forgetting the old Internet politico way of doing things: take everything for face value. If it's visually entertaining and progressive towards your goals, don't bother reading the fine print. The picture is pretty and sometimes, that's enough.

:lol


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Forget Nate Silver and independents and Ohio.

The Redskins will predict the winner of this election on Sunday when they face the Carolina Panthers. If the Skins win their last home game before the election, then the incumbent party wins. If they lose...yeah. This has been true every time save 2004 (17 of 18 times), and we all know BUSH cheated.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

http://www.cracked.com/article_20139_6-bizarre-factors-that-predict-every-presidential-election.html

Includes the redskins thing

spooky stuff


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Do they tell the children that Obama likes to bomb children in other countries?


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

no, but apparently 4% of children are rather smart


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

Do the children know Romney ties dogs to roofs of cars?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Do the children know Obama ate a dog? P. sure that would swing their vote.


----------



## roadkill_ (Jan 28, 2010)

Whatever happened to Ron Paul? Seemed like da realist *****!


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Florida:
NBC/WSJ/Marist - Romney 47 *Obama 49*


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

HardKoR said:


> I voted for neither one. You can say I "threw away" my vote. I really don't think either one of them deserve my vote. Both parties are so hell bent on being polar opposites they are the reason nothing gets done in DC. What is really sad the few good politicians are being overshadowed by extremists from both sides.


Were the third-party candidates not enough to pick from?


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

^Yes, because the greatest country in the world can't handle more than two parties.



Myers said:


> Do the children know Romney ties dogs to roofs of cars?


.....and stages hurricane relief events to look good for photo ops. What a guy.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

^lmao @ your Fox narrative. GOOD JOB.

Lack of Benghazi was disappointing though.


Can't believe I'll have to root for the Redskins. If they were playing the Giants or Eagles it'd be much easier.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

i liked how the new jersey governer told fox news to fuck off when they were trying to get him to praise romney

"bitch my state is underwater, i dont give two fucks about romney motherfucker"


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

What if the Redskins and Panthers tie? Does that mean Gary Johnson pulls off the miracle and everyone has a GREAT AWAKENING Tuesday morning?


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Redead said:


> i liked how the new jersey governer told fox news to fuck off when they were trying to get him to praise romney
> 
> "bitch my state is underwater, i dont give two fucks about romney motherfucker"


Yeah, Christie's cool as fuck. I think he secretly wants Romney to lose too so that he can run for POTUS himself in 2016.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

MrMister said:


> ^lmao @ your Fox narrative. GOOD JOB.
> 
> Lack of Benghazi was disappointing though.
> 
> ...


Hey hey hey, nothing wrong with cheering for the skins.. Unless you're a cowboys fan, if so then that's understandable. 

I'd be shocked if the Skins didn't win this Sunday though, looks like Obama's got a good omen


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

ya i can see Christie ruining in 2016 and wining


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

nm


----------



## bigbuxxx (May 28, 2011)

Huganomics said:


> ^Yes, because the greatest country in the world can't handle more than two parties.


what country are you referring to? can't be the us


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

9QA said:


> ya i can see Christie ruining in 2016 and wining


Except that he needs to do a better job of handling his temper and handling criticism from the media.



bigbuxxx said:


> what country are you referring to? can't be the us


He is referring to the US.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

#Mark said:


> Hey hey hey, nothing wrong with cheering for the skins.. Unless you're a cowboys fan, if so then that's understandable.
> 
> I'd be shocked if the Skins didn't win this Sunday though, looks like Obama's got a good omen


I'm a Cowboys fan.


I kinda wish Christie had run this time. I could stomach him being president. That can be a fat joke if you want it to be.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Ron Paul should have won the Republican nomination. GOP wanted a neo-con.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

Paul's ideas are too radical, he should be in a home.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Ron paul is to old and senile.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Yeah I get it, you guys form your world view based on mainstream news outlets.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

Nope, you are completely wrong and out of touch. Not surprise. Although I will admit that I will listen to anything Anderson Cooper says because he is dreamy.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Agreed with DubC.

About Anderson Cooper.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

DubC too THUG to think outside the box.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Republican vs math


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)




----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Obama support Murphy. Linda is done. Super majority coming and Obama winning. GOP is dead.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> Ron paul is to old and senile.


You've been schooled on this topic before in this thread. It's clear that you have no idea what you're talking about, and are incapable of any original thought.

That Ron Paul is totally senile. That is why he's had many of his predictions that he made almost a decade in advance come true today, right?



9QA said:


>


Now you're quoting the HUFFINGTON POST! :lmao:lmao


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Pretty sure I owned you paul bots already. stop bringing it up.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

actually the paul bots thoroughly embarrassed you by the use of facts and you basically just kept saying "lol, ron paul is the worst durrrr" and kept quoting biased and outdated sources


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Keep thinking that.
Obama has 83% chance to win according to silver. Not just huffingtonpost reporting it. Just face it GOP is dead and Obama is the future. FORWARD.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Ron Paul supporters don't want Romney to win. :kobe


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

How is the GOP dead? they arguably have more momentum currently due to obama's ineptitude


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Redead said:


> How is the GOP dead? they arguably have more momentum currently due to obama's ineptitude


No they don't. Thats what MSM wants you to think. They want peeople think its close race for ratings.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

lol but it is a close race looking at all these polls. If NATE SILVER is right, then by the electoral process Obama wins handily, but he could be wrong.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

The only reason Obama is winning is because Romney isn't exactly the most likable guy out there. If the GOP put up a candidate who was likable, a candidate who was inspired by the works of Ludwig Von Mises and FA Hayek, a candidate who fully believes in the Free Market, a candidate who is an advocate of personal freedom, then Obama would lose in a landslide, and a Candidate with the name PAUL in his name.

Of course, I'm talking about THIS man:










EDIT- Those polls aren't counting voter enthusiasm, something the GOP is beating the Democrats in easily. Obama might lose just based off the pure apathy of his base.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MethHardy said:


> Just face it GOP is dead and Obama is the future. FORWARD.


The GOP-controlled House says what's up.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Surely you mean the LAME stream Media

seriously though its looking like a close race all over. Even on CNN, and they dont even have ratings


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Redead said:


> Surely you mean the LAME stream Media
> 
> seriously though its looking like a close race all over. Even on CNN, and they dont even have ratings


I saw Palin talk the other day. Aside from not having a fucking clue what she was saying, she did throw out lamestream media and I marked.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Hope for Obama. Keep the drones alive!


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

i hate how both sides claim the 'mainstream media' is against them

um, MSNBC, fox news, you basically ARE the mainstream media!


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

*“In the end, more than freedom, they wanted security. They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all – security, comfort, and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again.”*
― Edward Gibbon


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

10/10 post brother GOON.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Ah, "freedom". Also known as Merica's favorite political buzz word.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/nov-2-for-romney-to-win-state-polls-must-be-statistically-biased/?smid=re-share

Romney has no chance. Anyone who thinks its close is falling for Fox news propaganda.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Nate Silver works for the New York Times, a Pro-Obama paper. Find an unbiased source, please.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

http://election.princeton.edu/

fine


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

They have Florida going for Obama. Another biased site.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

LOL okay. you're delusional. no point in posting to you.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Weak. Stand by NATE SILVER. I mean he's using math here. He even says if he's wrong and Romney wins it's because of a bias toward Obama in these polls.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

They get their polls from POLLSTER, which is run by Huffington Post, a Liberal website.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Nah he uses the crap like RASMUSSEN too.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

idk I guess We'll see in a few days. I'm prepared to mark out tho. If Obama loses im hang myself or move to canada.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

We'll find out tomorrow actually. REDSKINS RULE.

GOON how are you going watch tomorrow's Skins game? It's a no win scenario.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I'm hoping for a tie, which would mean BROTHER GARY pulls off the victory.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

MethHardy said:


> idk I guess We'll see in a few days. I'm prepared to mark out tho. If Obama loses im hang myself or move to canada.


because the difference between both men is that overwhelming?

the only difference is that fox news with shift from criticising the president to defending him

otherwise, i can see very, very little changing


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Redead said:


> because the difference between both men is that overwhelming?
> 
> the only difference is that fox news with shift from criticising the president to defending him
> 
> otherwise, i can see very, very little changing


The main changes we'll see are more people complaining about abortions, gay marriage, and other "social" issues if Romney wins.


----------



## Dark_Link (Nov 27, 2011)

I want neither of these two morons in tbh


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

THE GOAT speaking the truth about LIBYA.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

http://act.watchdog.net/petitions/1818?share_ref=UIdkAAVRi0A


Don't know how true this is but Mitt might have gotten himself into trouble.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Still not as bad as Obama's unconstitutional wars and killing of innocent civilians.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace. Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars. Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, doubled the stock market, created 12 straight quarters of GDP growth, created 30 straight months of private sector job growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

ok that entire post is bullshit, and you just copied and pasted it off another website

plagiarism is a serious offence boy. youd know that if you went to college


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Getting someone to ban him from the thread. Plagiarism will not be tolerated. 

It's not bullshit though.

Ok it is lol.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

nah keep him

i wanna see the potential meltdown when obama may lose

same goes for everyone

ive always heard stories of those wackos who threaten to leave the country when the other guy wins and i wanna see it live


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Obama did not get the US out of Iraq. fpalm

We left in accordance with the troop withdrawal timeline established by George W Bush. Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops in Iraq past the deadline. Every time Obama takes credit for ending the war in Iraq he is being extremely dishonest.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

@ Redead: Wasn't serious, but plagiarism is really lame. Pretty sure it is against the rules and a ban worthy offense.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

how did obama get gaddafi exactly?

you know who did get gaddafi? those guys in benghazi

really makes you think. although the pentagon really did arm them so yeah, technically obama did do it


----------



## FMLSK (Nov 4, 2012)

Obama 4 Pres


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Redead said:


> nah keep him
> 
> i wanna see the potential meltdown when obama may lose
> 
> ...


Obama isn't going to lose and no one is leaving the country.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

um, thats the joke

everyone always goes crazy and threatens to leave the country, but they wonnt because its absurd

thats what makes it funny


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

True.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> Obama did not get the US out of Iraq. fpalm
> 
> We left in accordance with the troop withdrawal timeline established by George W Bush. Obama wanted to keep 10,000 troops in Iraq past the deadline. Every time Obama takes credit for ending the war in Iraq he is being extremely dishonest.


Obama just needs to stop to pretend. Or stop pretending. It seems this game is simply never-ending.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

Bush was forced to agree on a deadline because he and most republicans felt it wasnt necessary to think about getting out of Iraq. Bush established the time but Obama drew up the plans and meet with officials to plan HOW to take the troops out.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

DubC said:


> Bush was forced to agree on a deadline because he and most republicans felt it wasnt necessary to think about getting out of Iraq. Bush established the time but Obama drew up the plans and meet with officials to plan HOW to take the troops out.


Uh yeah, of course Obama handled the actual withdrawal. He was THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF at the time. Doesn't change the fact he wanted to extend our military presence beyond Bush's deadline. For him to take credit for "ending a war" he wanted to continue is ridiculous.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

There was interest to extent the training that the U.S. was giving to Iraqis. Maliki was in favor for it.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

This seems to be a lot closer than I was expecting it to be.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

http://triblive.com/politics/politi...esident-lee-presidential-voters#axzz2BCil7kLj


Pennsylvania is too close to call, 47-47. Independents are breaking for Romney, Obama team must be shitting themselves right now.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

9QA said:


> George W. Bush inherited a strong economy, a budget surplus, and a nation at peace. Eight years later, he left Obama with a shattered economy, a trillion dollar deficit, and two useless wars. Obama saved the country from another Great Depression, rebuilt GM, reformed healthcare, reformed Wall Street, doubled the stock market, created 12 straight quarters of GDP growth, created 30 straight months of private sector job growth, got Bin Laden, got Gaddafi, and got us out of Iraq.


I remember very well that Bush inherited an Economy that was trashed from the Internet Bust in 2000.

The Stock Market Doubled only after Investors realized Obama wasn't so bad, Many Corporations became leaner in productivity, and Stimulus Money was indirectly being pumped into the Markets. As for GM, They should have went out of Business or Merge with Chrysler.

As for the Jobless Rate, More people are dropping out for looking for work ,Therefore, they are not counted.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Roger Sterling said:


> http://triblive.com/politics/politi...esident-lee-presidential-voters#axzz2BCil7kLj
> 
> 
> Pennsylvania is too close to call, 47-47. Independents are breaking for Romney, Obama team must be shitting themselves right now.


Obama losing Pennsylvania might just be the greatest choke job in election history.


----------



## theBIGvalboski (Oct 31, 2006)

Gary Johnson not on the poll = poll with no integrity


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Left wing rep.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

polls from Sunday, November 04

NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Obama 48, Romney 47	*Obama +1*


Columbus Dispatch* Obama 50, Romney 48	*Obama +2
*
Critical Insights Obama 49, Romney 42	*Obama +7*

Western NE University Obama 58, Romney 40 *Obama +18*

polls from Sunday, November 04
click for poll info


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Why are you posting polls from Maine and Massachusetts?


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Why are you posting polls from Maine and Massachusetts?


Because if he didn't have any to post then he would cease to exist.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

polls from Sunday, November 04

NBC News/Wall St. Jrnl Obama 48, Romney 47	*Obama +1*


Columbus Dispatch* Obama 50, Romney 48	*Obama +2
*
Critical Insights Obama 49, Romney 42	*Obama +7*

Western NE University Obama 58, Romney 40 *Obama +18*

polls from Sunday, November 04
click for poll info all


all polls showing Obama is way up , cant help you hate that ! cnn poll will be out at 8 tonight!


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Polls don't matter 9QA. Panthers are leading the Redskins 14-3.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Starting to think Obama gave 9QA a "free" cell phone.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

MrMister said:


> Polls don't matter 9QA. Panthers are leading the Redskins 14-3.


 President Barack Obama enters the final hours of the 2012 campaign with an edge in the hunt for the 270 electoral votes needed to win and more ways to reach that magic number. 

it matters .... hello 2008!!


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)




----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Not sure how Obama being up in Maine and Massachusetts matters but hey, Obama gave you a free jitterbug. I can't tell you anything.


----------



## Dunk20 (Jul 3, 2012)

How can you people want a dumbass like Romney to win?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Because I don't want 9QA to ever be happy.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

Polling Averages Show Momentum For Obama In Final Days http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1226


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

CamillePunk said:


>


You mean Bushphone.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)




----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Those damn Buddhists..


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Still better than Obama's legion of followers.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

#Mark said:


> Those damn Buddhists..


Don't forget the atheist muslims.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Redskins throwing the game so Romney wins.


----------



## BigWillie54 (Feb 1, 2011)

TKOK! said:


> Redskins throwing the game so Romney wins.


Considering the Qbs on both sides of the ball........doubt that.

Sent from my MB612 using VerticalSports.Com App


----------



## BigWillie54 (Feb 1, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


> Still better than Obama's legion of followers.


Both sides have their idiots but as an outside observer, the dummy of the repub party are the dumber of the two groups.Dem dummy are dumb but their stupidity isnt far from fact they just spew them out out of context. 

Sent from my MB612 using VerticalSports.Com App


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Nah the majority of both parties' voting populations are completely uninformed. Only difference is the GOP neo-cons bring religion into it so they come off crazier. Which is appropriate.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

"GOD is in control of this election, and GOD will strike down the Obama Administration and grace us with GOD KING Mitt Romney on November 6th. GOD BLESS."- Neo-Con GOON

Mike Shanahan is a Republican. This game confirms it.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/baron...ney-wins-handily/article/2512470#.UJbY2MXA-Sq

Put this in your pipe and smoke it, 9QA.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Panthers/Redskins at the end was like a competition of which team could suck more. A fitting representation of this election.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Panthers defeat the Redskins 21-13. Congratulations to Presidential-Elect Willard "Mitt" Romney.


----------



## Alleluia (Aug 25, 2012)

I don't see why people would vote Obama again. He hasn't done anything good and he is spending too much money. He's rediculous.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

REDICULOUS


----------



## WutChagoNAdoBrothA (May 9, 2010)

Obama 3:16


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Huganomics said:


> Panthers/Redskins at the end was like a competition of which team could suck more. A fitting representation of this election.


lol. So true.


----------



## bigbuxxx (May 28, 2011)

Alleluia said:


> I don't see why people would vote Obama again. He hasn't done anything good and he is spending too much money. He's rediculous.


and Romney is going to do better somehow?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

bigbuxxx said:


> and Romney is going to do better somehow?


He won't do better but for some reason people think he will.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

I still haven't met a Romney supporter that can tell me why they are voting for Romney without bringing up Obama in anyway.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Neither have I... I don't think Romney supporters have any idea of what his policies are

Though i'm not sure Mitt does either


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

#Mark said:


> Neither have I... I don't think Romney supporters have any idea of what his policies are
> 
> *Though i'm not sure Mitt does either*


lol. He's just clueless overall.


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Antho10000 said:


> I still haven't met a Romney supporter that can tell me why they are voting for Romney without bringing up Obama in anyway.


Just like Democrats can't give me one reason to vote for Obama without bringing up Bush years or Romney.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Roger Sterling said:


> Just like Democrats can't give me one reason to vote for Obama without bringing up Bush years or Romney.


Yeah, if Obama wins 4 more (a big if) then I'm looking forward to seeing his excuses 3 years from now when we've seen no improvement.

To answer their question, I'm voting for Romney because of his record of bipartisanship and his experience in balancing the budget, as well as the fact that he wants to reform the out of control welfare system (dem Obama phones) and lower taxes (think Ronald Reagan, the gov't collected two times more revenue in taxes when he lowered them).


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

I dont think anyone really has 'policies'

I mean hell, 'hope' is as vague of a policy as it gets. And Romney switches on a minute to minute basis

Every guy essential defines himself as "yeah im not great but how bad was that guy before me"


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

The polls would have to be vastly wrong for Romney to win. http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1231


----------



## Roger Sterling (Dec 23, 2009)

Polls continue to show a Democratic/Republican/Independent electorate very similar to 2008, IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.

The same liberals saying Obama will win handily are the same liberals who on November 7th will be blaming white people for rejecting a black President.

Independents are breaking big for Romney, and Republican enthusiasm will turn out people in droves. Deal with it.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

I was looking at polls from PPP today that basically show ties for Romney and Obama in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia. Problem is those would require the electorate to be better for Obama than in 2008, and in North Carolina's case, nearly double as favorable towards him.

Regardless of who wins, I hope they can have a term void of obstructionism by the republican house or (likely) democratic senate. That helps nobody. If this is the last time I post in this thread, good luck to whoever wins.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Anywhere Romney is within 1-3 points, it's a good sign for Romney, seeing as more than half of Independent voters are swinging his way. Obama lost the vast majority of Independent voters, which just might cost him tomorrow.

I still think Obama will take Pennsylvania, but if it's close, I expect Romney to take Ohio. Both states are almost the same in terms of how the voters act and since Romney is closer in Ohio than Pennsylvania, it might be enough to push him to victory.


----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)

It doesn't matter what you think. I'm going to put this in terms that you will understand. I'll be the guy standing with my hands raised high after it's all said and done as the headline reads what I predicted: Barack Obama whips Mitt Romney's ass on Election Day!!!

- Vic


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

So the refs are the ones that have awarded Romney the presidency. They blew a whistle on DeAngelo Williams's TD. That play was dead. You can't overturn a blown whistle that kills a play. This story has only just started to gain steam and will be talked about for centuries to come.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

It is well known that Tom Symonette, the man who blew the whistle, is a true patriot and a defender of LIBERTY.


----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)

Around what time(EST) is it unofficially announced on a station like CNN that someone has won the election.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

It will be very late, and it might even last a couple of days if it's REALLY CLOSE due to the amount of absentee ballots that were cast. 

I doubt it will be like 2008 where we knew who won around 11:00 PM EST. It will be a late night for sure.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

dxbender said:


> Around what time(EST) is it unofficially announced on a station like CNN that someone has won the election.


They'll only unofficially announce it when one of them has 270 electoral votes. There is no way to know when this will be if Ohio, Penn, Florida, Colorado, NH, Virginia, etc are too close to call. It's highly likely multiple states will be too close to call. We might not even find out until sometime Wed during the day. It's possible it extends further than even that.


----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)

Never knew it took so long. In Canada, we usually know results that same day.

When will we know about the Connecticut elections(to see if Linda McMahon won or not)


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Speaking of Linda:










LMAO! She's desperate as hell. She's not winning.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

dxbender said:


> Never knew it took so long. In Canada, we usually know results that same day.
> 
> When will we know about the Connecticut elections(to see if Linda McMahon won or not)


We'll probably know soon after the polls close in Connecticut about McMahon.


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

last election (US president) it took me like 12 hours to find out who won, and I was on an Italian Navy Base in Naples.

I don't generally like to discuss politics, it gets too dicey sometimes, but I do think Obama is winning, and it's not going to be very close.


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar (Nov 12, 2006)

i think everyone's forgetting the golden rule of this race.

once you go black, you don't go back.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

We'll probably know by Wednesday morning/afternoon

Honestly, I don't think it's gonna be that close.. The only way Obama doesn't handily win is because of low voter turn out in battle ground states or states in the NE affected by Sandy (I know it won't have any implications on the electoral vote but more so on the popular vote)


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

If it isn't decided by Wednesday morning/afternoon, then it IS close.

Tomorrow has potential to be a disaster for Obama. Democrat enthusiasm is down, while Republican enthusiasm is up. You also have to factor in that more than half of Independent voters are going for Romney.

This might just be a repeat of 2010 in the sense that Republicans will walk through hell to see their guy win, while Democrats won't.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

I thought the winner is known by that night?


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Antho10000 said:


> I thought the winner is known by that night?


You weren't around for 2000 were you. This thing could be as close and contentious.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

MrMister said:


> You weren't around for 2000 were you. This thing could be as close and contentious.


2000 was a disaster.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

GOON The Legend said:


> This might just be a repeat of 2010 in the sense that Republicans will walk through hell to see their guy win, while Democrats won't.


No kidding, the amount of reports of voter suppression by GOP poll watchers in minority precincts is disgusting.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

MrMister said:


> You weren't around for 2000 were you. This thing could be as close and contentious.


I was but I was 10 so I gave zero shits.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

Guess we'll all see if these numbers from this site holds up or not. http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1297


----------



## TexasTornado (Oct 12, 2011)

Not a big fan of either but.. Obama. I am not voting, though


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/05/Obama-closes-to-half-empty-stadium-in-Ohio

^^ Haha, poor Obama.

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/04/Gigantic-Rally-For-Romney-In-PA

Romney might just get Pennsylvania with this kind of turnout.


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

Mithro said:


> http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/11/05/Obama-closes-to-half-empty-stadium-in-Ohio
> 
> ^^ Haha, poor Obama.
> 
> ...


Interesting website you've stumbled across there. Bookmarked. Does Fox News fund it?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Final national NBC/WSJ poll: Obama 48%, Romney 47% 

Obama ahead in Colorado, Iowa and Wisconsin

Poll: Obama Leads in Wisconsin, Iowa

Polls: Obama holds 1-point lead in Fla

Obama Leads in Nevada 

Latest presidential polls: President Obama has edge over Romney in New Hampshire, Iowa



Virginia poll: Obama 48% – Romney 47%

CNN Poll: Obama 50% – Romney 47% in Ohio


----------



## Hajduk1911 (Mar 12, 2010)

Obama will probably win

I personally am voting for Gary Johnson, I don't vote for R/D anymore in any election


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Hajduk1911 said:


> Obama will probably win
> 
> I personally am voting for Gary Johnson, I don't vote for R/D anymore in any election


i dont hate you for that it will help Obama.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

In spirit of american elections. Newest pole on demonic possessions, ghosts and climate change (pole participants republicans), by the Young Turks.


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

3 Things To Keep In Mind Today...

1. The moron political pundits on the cable news channels will probably make a big deal about likely exit polling data showing Romney winning Independents. Who wins “Independents” is a meaningless data point now. A huge percentage of Republicans stopped calling themselves Republicans after the George W. Bush years and now call themselves Independents, even though they still vote Republican. Because of this, Romney will likely win Independents, but this is also why Democrats outnumber Republicans. See why the entire debate over party ID in polls being “bias” against Republicans has been so dubious? It all depends on how effective pollsters are at getting “Independents” who are really lifelong Republicans to actually admit they are Republican. The polls that do will show a higher percentage of Republicans, but will show Obama doing better with Independents. The polls that don’t will show a lower percentage of Republicans, but will show Romney doing better with Independents. It’s just two different names for the same thing.

2. The pundits will also probably make a big deal about the first results that come in for particular states. In some states, like the ones with early voting, Obama will probably start out in the lead since those early voting returns will come in first. In other states, Republican counties tend to report first, while big urban cities (which are usually Democratic) come in later, meaning Romney could have leads in states he will go on to lose (or vice-versa).

3. Drudge and other political sites will begin tossing around “leaked” exit polling data this afternoon. These “leaked” numbers are usually completely wrong, just ask President Kerry. Wait until the major networks begin releasing exit polling data, that data is usually fairly accurate (though the network exit polling has been off before too). Of course, the TV pundits will almost surely misrepresent and completely misunderstand what the exit polling data really is saying, but that’s a general problem with the crappyness of our TV news coverage that isn’t going to be fixed anytime soon.

taken from http://nowecantpolitics.com/?p=1340


----------



## RobertGcoupe (Sep 13, 2011)

Obama taxing the "rich" is another way of saying that Obama is taxing everybody that has a job, such as a lot of us on here... go ahead vote for him and see your taxes go up. Romney on the other hand knows what he is doing


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

My plea to all those out there today that are registered to vote in the United States. 

JUST VOTE!

Don't matter who you vote for, why you vote for them, just vote. The only wasted vote is the one not used.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

lol you should only be voting if you live in a swing state. Outside of that, your vote doesnt fucking matter.

The electoral college is the biggest joke of a system ever invented.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)




----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

I just voted. Obama. just so everyone knows...in case you couldn't hear my voice or something.


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


>


LoL, isn't that the muppet who was in the news because he said something along the lines of "The airport staff should only search people who look like terrorists." and then got connected with some white supremacist groups, etc.? :lmao


----------



## kregnaz (Apr 1, 2012)




----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Evil Neville said:


> LoL, isn't that the muppet who was in the news because he said something along the lines of "The airport staff should only search people who look like terrorists." and then got connected with some white supremacist groups, etc.? :lmao


If by "connected" you mean through donations, then yeah but they can't prevent who donates to their campaign, since campaign donations are a form of free speech.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> If by "connected" you mean through donations, then yeah but they can't prevent who donates to their campaign, since campaign donations are a form of free speech.


declining a donation isnt a difficult thing to do...


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Ziggler Mark said:


> declining a donation isnt a difficult thing to do...


Susan G. Komen did it.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

freudian slip? I dont think so.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Stop spreading lies~!


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Says the guy supporting Romney.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I voted for Gary Johnson. What on earth are you talking about?


----------



## samizayn (Apr 25, 2011)

Ziggler Mark said:


> freudian slip? I dont think so.


:lmao

Sounds like a rapper name. R.Money up in this shiz.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

Voted for Obama


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Just got back

Live in VA and voted for Obama.. Yep, my vote matters


----------



## Evil Neville (Oct 2, 2012)

Ziggler Mark said:


> freudian slip? I dont think so.


If i was merukan i'd vote for R-MONEY, sounds like someone who knows what's up in the hood, that Romney *** on the other hand...


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

I haven't/am not going to vote.

Kansas, lol


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Criticized Mitt Romney and Barack Obama on facebook. Incoming shit storm from my Republican family and Liberal friends.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Criticized Mitt Romney and Barack Obama on facebook. Incoming shit storm from my Republican family and Liberal friends.


Facebook has really turned me against some people. Seeing "friends" bash obama for stupid reasons and praise romney when they are poor ass losers. im just deleting a lot of them.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

im sure they will miss you

well i just voted


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

Hallelujah, the election season finale! 



greendayedgehead said:


> :lmao
> 
> Sounds like a rapper name. R.Money up in this shiz.














Ziggler Mark said:


> lol you should only be voting if you live in a swing state. Outside of that, your vote doesnt fucking matter.
> 
> The electoral college is the biggest joke of a system ever invented.


You do realize there's more to the general election than voting for President, right? Local politicians, issues, etc.

If you're referring only to the Presidential ballot, ignore this part of my post.


----------



## Ziggler Mark (Jan 1, 2012)

Bestia 666 said:


> You do realize there's more to the general election than voting for President, right? Local politicians, issues, etc.
> 
> If you're referring only to the Presidential ballot, ignore this part of my post.


i realize that, and also realize that since all politicians are full of shit, that there's no need for me to vote. No matter who wins, we all lose.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

You have US citizenship, Redead?

***

I don't know if there's any kind of voter that pisses me off more than the ones who say "They both suck, but you just have to choose which one is better". fpalm


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

no, i just walked into the voting station, walked into the booth, waited a few minutes, came out and shouted 'democracy!'

and got the 'i voted' sticker


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Ghetto Anthony said:


> I haven't/am not going to vote.
> 
> Kansas, lol


I'm in Kansas too. I voted just to vote. I know it means absolutely nothing though.


----------



## HOJO (Feb 25, 2012)

Obama.
Romney lives in a fucking bubble and he's only out for the rich. Country will be beyond dead if he wins. He obviously doesn't give a fuck about anyone else but the republican bubble-headed fucks with loads of money. Us at middle class/poor, are fucked. 

"Go ask your parents"
fpalm


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

I had the option to do a write in ballot. Was tempted to put down Daniel Craig, despite him being British, and not political, and JAMES BOND!!!!


----------



## JigsawKrueger (Sep 9, 2010)




----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)

When do we know Connecticut election results?


----------



## SUPER HANS (Jun 7, 2011)

As an English man I'm very happy to see most people on here voting Obama. I wonder who the wrestlers vote for..


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Connecticut closes at 8pm eastern. We'll know sometime shortly after that unless it's extremely close. I haven't paid attention to it so not sure if it's close or not.


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior (Oct 19, 2011)

According to some sources, David Cameron wants Obama to win. 
2 terrible leaders. Figures :troll


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Why would David Cameron (conservative) want Obama (liberal) to win? I'm calling BS unless he is just saying it because he wants people to like him.


----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)




----------



## Bushmaster (Sep 28, 2010)

Just finished voting. Was my first time and actually felt good :durant3

Probably should have waited last minute, place was packed.


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior (Oct 19, 2011)

Karma101 said:


> Why would David Cameron (conservative) want Obama (liberal) to win? I'm calling BS unless he is just saying it because he wants people to like him.


That was my point...


----------



## Swark (Jan 3, 2012)

Blue. said:


> That was my point...


Because if Obama was a politician over here he would probably be considered as conservative if not more conservative than DC.


----------



## 189558 (Aug 18, 2009)

I didn't vote as neither candidate interests me. But apparently Romney won in Indiana.


----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)

So when do we find out who is the best bullshitter.


----------



## magusnova (Jan 3, 2012)

Looks like Linda is losing bad.

http://www.courant.com/news/politic...on-chris-murphy-1107-20121101,0,7707521.story


----------



## Ether (Aug 28, 2012)

^ :jay2


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

78% to %20. Linda loses bad. hahah


----------



## killacamt (Jul 23, 2006)

MethHardy said:


> 78% to %20. Linda loses bad. hahah


Linda got owned, wonder what she will do now???


----------



## Disciple514 (Jul 29, 2010)

It seems Linda Mcmahon has lost another election. Now please stop trying to run for public office.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

florida and ohio leaning blue so far...hope they stay blue and pa needs to go blue soon.


----------



## kregnaz (Apr 1, 2012)

MethHardy said:


> 78% to %20. Linda loses bad. hahah


:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes:yes

Please let this be the actual end result, please please please please please please !


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Its already over for her. Chris Murphy declared winner by landslide.


----------



## GothicBohemian (May 26, 2012)

Linda's catching up a bit as more polling stations report in, but she's still far behind (around 35%). Looks like she's losing, and it won't even be close. 

I love election nights. I'm not even American but I still made myself all comfy for a long night of politics on tv. Awesome stuff. :mark:


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

there are more than 3 candidates

http://www.cracked.com/quick-fixes/5-crazy-people-who-you-can-elect-president-tomorrow/


----------



## Cre5po (Mar 2, 2008)

I've read nothing about Romney so I'm briefly looking through stuff now, must say I want Obama to win.

As for Linda McMahon, got to laugh really


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

Karma101 said:


> Why would David Cameron (conservative) want Obama (liberal) to win? I'm calling BS unless he is just saying it because he wants people to like him.


Americans are generally more conservative than Brits, Obama isn't too far away from Cameron.


----------



## HOJO (Feb 25, 2012)

killacamt said:


> Linda got owned, wonder what she will do now???


In B4 3MB, Tensai, and Brodis Clay are released :jay2


----------



## 1andOnlyDobz! (Jan 3, 2011)

Y2J Problem said:


> Americans are generally more conservative than Brits, Obama isn't too far away from Cameron.


Agreed there. Obama is right of center in his politics I reckon. I'm not his biggest fan. My beliefs are left of center, a fair bit left of center. Obama to me is a 'lesser of two evils' type. Cameron is right wing and you're right, not too far off Obama, although Obama is closer to the center than Cameron (he would have to be tbh, being a 'Democrat'). Btw, I'm British so oddly enough I'm getting involved with a topic that doesn't affect me haha


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

Obama is not right wing, brah.


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

1andOnlyDobz! said:


> Agreed there. Obama is right of center in his politics I reckon. I'm not his biggest fan. My beliefs are left of center, a fair bit left of center. Obama to me is a 'lesser of two evils' type. Cameron is right wing and you're right, not too far off Obama, although Obama is closer to the center than Cameron (he would have to be tbh, being a 'Democrat'). Btw, I'm British so oddly enough I'm getting involved with a topic that doesn't affect me haha


Mainstream politics in both the US and UK are right of centre I'd say. And I'm the same, For me Democarats and Labour are both too right wing for me, but they're the lesser of two evils.


----------



## God™ (May 26, 2008)

El Conquistador said:


> Obama is not right wing, brah.


On a global scale he is.


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

El Conquistador said:


> Obama is not right wing, brah.


Not by American standards no.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

america has two political parties

far right and moderate right


----------



## 4everEyebrowRaisin (Feb 25, 2012)

Obama is just less of a cunt.


----------



## GothicBohemian (May 26, 2012)

El Conquistador said:


> Obama is not right wing, brah.


Compared to what's considered left and right in some countries, he is. Democrats in the US would fall pretty far right of a true left wing party here in Canada, for example.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Redead said:


> america has two political parties
> 
> far right and moderate right


Wow.. Sums it up perfectly


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior (Oct 19, 2011)




----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)

Wonder what WWE will do now that the election is over and Linda lost.

Funny how on CNN, they had the result for Connecticut up for over a minute, emphasizing the fact that she lost lol. And of course, they had to mention WWE when talking about Linda McMahon, being like "and she had world wrestling on her side"


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

This isn't a global election... 

Keep your ethnocentrism out of here. j/k


----------



## JigsawKrueger (Sep 9, 2010)

Compared to Canada and most European countries the Democrats are as a whole on the right. But Obama seems pretty much to the left, on a global scale, but he obviously won't 'rock the boat' otherwise he wouldn't have even got the Democrat nominee in 2008.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

linda coulda won a WORLD election

but alas, not an american one


----------



## 1andOnlyDobz! (Jan 3, 2011)

Y2J Problem said:


> Mainstream politics in both the US and UK are right of centre I'd say. And I'm the same, For me Democarats and Labour are both too right wing for me, but they're the lesser of two evils.


I would tend to totally agree with that analogy actually. Shame too. Oddly enough I did a quiz on which political party I'd come out with and I ended up Green Party because of my political stance  And tbh I saw their manifesto at the last round of UK election and was impressed. They got serious.


----------



## 1andOnlyDobz! (Jan 3, 2011)

JigsawKrueger said:


> Compared to Canada and most European countries the Democrats are as a whole on the right. But Obama seems pretty much to the left, on a global scale, but he obviously won't 'rock the boat' otherwise he wouldn't have even got the Democrat nominee in 2008.


He has definitely put in policies which people 'left of center' would be ok with. Affordable healthcare, higher taxes on the rich etc.


----------



## 1andOnlyDobz! (Jan 3, 2011)

dxbender said:


> Wonder what WWE will do now that the election is over and Linda lost.
> 
> Funny how on CNN, they had the result for Connecticut up for over a minute, emphasizing the fact that she lost lol. And of course, they had to mention WWE when talking about Linda McMahon, being like *"and she had world wrestling on her side"*


which she obviously didn't


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

Strong triple post.


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

1andOnlyDobz! said:


> I would tend to totally agree with that analogy actually. Shame too. Oddly enough I did a quiz on which political party I'd come out with and I ended up Green Party because of my political stance  And tbh I saw their manifesto at the last round of UK election and was impressed. They got serious.


Yeah I'm the same, shame they've got no real chance of getting elected.

Only 32% of votes in Ohio counted, gonna be a long night.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Ugh, I can't watch these news shows. They're so CRAZY! Every single one of them! And they have updates every 2 seconds, updates that don't even matter. They make it much more intense then it needs to be (but I guess that's their job).
I'm just waiting for Stewart/Colbert to come on with their live coverage! That's seriously the only news shows I ever watch.
Watch those two every night they're on whether through DVR or when they come on. 
That's not even a joke. I learn more in an hour from those two, than I would from a full day of the 24 hour news cycle.


----------



## obby (May 19, 2009)

Looks like the majority of Americans don't use the Wrestlingforum.com polls


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Florida still has the crown of being the troll state :lmao


----------



## Fargerov (Sep 20, 2011)

Right i'm not so keen on my US politics, but by watching CNN, am I right to assume that whoever wins Florida should win overall?


----------



## El Conquistador (Aug 16, 2006)

Fargerov said:


> Right i'm not so keen on my US politics, but by watching CNN, am I right to assume that whoever wins Florida should win overall?


No, not necessarily. Romney can have FL and lose OH and Virginia, which would reelect Obama. What you have to consider is this: you have a bunch of Puerto Rican, Haitian and Cuban defectors in Dade and Broward County. Even the caucasian sector is quite liberal in Miami, too. Also, a lot of retired white folks migrate to FL and historically vote conservative (Republican). Tampa Bay is usually an undecided major city.

So, effectively, Dade County + Broward County will always be liberal, the rest of the state truly has to vote conservative for Mittens to take it.


----------



## TheStudOfEngland (Sep 1, 2012)

Fargerov said:


> Right i'm not so keen on my US politics, but by watching CNN, am I right to assume that whoever wins Florida should win overall?


Florida might turn out to be the most important and deciding state yeah. Basically whoever wins Florida will more than likely win the election!


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

Fargerov said:


> Right i'm not so keen on my US politics, but by watching CNN, am I right to assume that whoever wins Florida should win overall?


Pretty much a must win for Romney, not so much for Obama.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

I'm convinced that Florida has no idea how to count votes


----------



## Theproof (Apr 9, 2009)

TheStudOfEngland said:


> Florida might turn out to be the most important and deciding state yeah. Basically *whoever wins Florida will more than likely win the election!*


Um....in Obama's case yeah. Not so much for Romney.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

I think Obama's got this one won. Just give it time. 

Honestly, though, I am sad that my write in of "None of the Above" has done so poorly. I'm crushed! lol.


----------



## SteenIsGod (Dec 20, 2011)

Looks Like Red Skins Rule will be Wrong this time.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Obama will most likely win California. Florida has to be a must win for Romney. I see Obama winning this IMO


Am I doing this right Americans?


----------



## C-Cool (Apr 2, 2010)

A lesson to Todd Akin: Never talk about rape without actual data.

Dumbass. That would have been a very easy win without his ongoing bout with stupidity.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

This shit is in the bag.

Y'all ready for Christie vs. Clinton/Cuomo yet?


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)




----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Dolce & Gabbana said:


>


That seems about right.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Stewart is on.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

#Mark said:


> I'm convinced that Florida has no idea how to count votes


Or how to prosecute criminals.


----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar (Nov 12, 2006)

Obama's got this one in the bag, me thinks


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Obama wins California. Shits in the bag unless Romney gets Florida.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## Sarcasm1 (Aug 24, 2011)

Ha Florida/Ohio haven't been this important since Lebron.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Obama wins. Meh.


----------



## ABrown (Jan 30, 2007)




----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

bama


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

Obama wins, America still loses either way.


----------



## Notorious (Jun 14, 2009)




----------



## Sir Digby Chicken Caesar (Nov 12, 2006)

thank fuck for that


----------



## Aram (Jun 28, 2011)

congrats, obama. you almost got beat by a man who believes in magic underwear.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

*OBAMA WINS. AMERICA WINS. HEALTHCARE AND ABORTIONS FOR ALL. OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Nice! The best man won! bama


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Damnit.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

lol at Steve Jobs saying that he would be a one term President.


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

I voted Green but Obama's troll and "bitch please" faces are too legit.


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

BAH GAWD OBAMA WINS! OBAMA WINS! DOWN GOES ROMNEY! THE OBAMA ERA HAS BEGUN!


----------



## itssoeasy23 (Jul 19, 2011)

America moves forward.


----------



## O10101 (Jul 26, 2012)

Thank god. Had Romney won we'd all be worse off, you Romney supporters should thank us for not allowing you to put that hypocritical easily influenced moron into office.

4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS! 4 MORE YEARS!


----------



## obby (May 19, 2009)

Celebrate good times, come on!


----------



## virus21 (Sep 22, 2009)

So Obama won. Well its not like the country would be better if he didn't


----------



## chargebeam (Jul 12, 2011)

Phew!! Good job America, good job!


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Amber B said:


> I voted Green but Obama's troll and "bitch please" faces are too legit.


I went with Romney but that picture is awesome.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Lesser of two evils.


----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)

China is saved...


----------



## KuritaDavion (Feb 17, 2008)

Jon Jones said:


> Lesser of two evils.


But isn't it always?


----------



## virus21 (Sep 22, 2009)

I guess Hollywood will be happy. They still have a president that will come on thier shows and invite them to diners.


----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)

KuritaDavion said:


> But isn't it always?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)




----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

KuritaDavion said:


> But isn't it always?


Well played bama


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)




----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)




----------



## Alleluia (Aug 25, 2012)

I'm going to give Obama a chance but I really don't see him doing anything for this country.


----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)

I bet FOX is hilarious right now, bet they blew a gasket or two.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Alleluia said:


> I'm going to give Obama a chance


No you aren't. You're still going to be mad.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

So, looks like Obama has won. WE GET TO KEEP BIG BIRD.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

WWE_TNA said:


> I bet FOX is hilarious right now, bet they blew a gasket or two.


I checked them out. They're mad as hell. lol.


----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> lol at Steve Jobs saying that he would be a one term President.


Shouldn't have added: _"over my dead body"_





bama


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Sandy will be blamed for this.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

kobra860 said:


> I checked them out. They're mad as hell. lol.


Really? When I was watching before it was official it seemed like they just heard Christmas was canceled.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

Obama be gettin some..


----------



## The Ultimate Warrior (Oct 19, 2011)




----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

"Close race" = we need ratings.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Alot of people believed in Obama the first time around, including me. That all went down the drain when Obama did nothing for 4 years, with the only highlight being the death of Bin Laden, assuming that's even true. I won't blame him because its not the president, but corporate America that runs the country. Romney or Obama, nothing would've made a major change that most people want for America. Romney would've made things worse for the the middle class / poor people, while Obama would've just been a stalemate.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

yes we did !!!







--


----------



## Liam Miller (Jan 25, 2007)

Some rich american white folk and obviously a host of ******** must be pretty mad right now.

I could not deal with Romney and David Cameron, Obama softens the blow.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

obama won because i pretended to vote for him

he got the critical redead imaginary swing vote


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

FOX news sounds like a funeral :lmao


----------



## -XERO- (Jan 31, 2011)

*YES!*


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

9qa just jizzed


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Jon Jones said:


> FOX news sounds like a funeral :lmao


:lmao They are so bitter!


----------



## chargebeam (Jul 12, 2011)

I hope he sings tonight!


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Dems got senate. repubs got house.


----------



## Stone Hot (Dec 30, 2010)

Funny how Mitt Romney won the popular vote by over one million votes and he still lost, this is whats wrong in America. We do not have a democracy.


----------



## Y2J Problem (Dec 17, 2007)

Donald Trump having a meltdown on twitter, such an odious little cunt.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

Donald J. Trump ‏@realDonaldTrump
Our country is now in serious and unprecedented trouble...like never before.


Cry me a river Donald :lmao


----------



## Theproof (Apr 9, 2009)

Boma!!! Boma!!!


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

Stone Hot said:


> Funny how Mitt Romney won the popular vote by over one million votes and he still lost, this is whats wrong in America. We do not have a democracy.


Mitt Romney won the popular vote? Are you sure about that, buddy?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!!


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

9QA said:


> yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!! yes we did !!!


*high five*


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Notorious said:


>


I bet they had so much fun making that video.



Ayyyyeeee.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

So the contest of the lesser evils is over? 

Good. Can we end this mindless stupidity with the ads & the media coverage now. I am beyond sick of it after months of this crap.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Ah fuck off Citizens United. Democrat Senators won too. Those rape fuckers lost. 

CUYAHOGA

ROVE is demanding Fox rescind them calling Ohio for Obama lmao.


Back to senators/congress...shit still can't get done with this House.


----------



## Stone Hot (Dec 30, 2010)

were fucked


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Karl rove to make a comeback in 2016 with Jeb Bush

Clinton running her campaign against the republican candidate in a cell when the lights go out and red pyro hits




THATS GOTTA BE JEB


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Karl Rove :lmao
Even FOX is trolling him :lmao


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

Ryback-Cena 2016 :vince


----------



## HOJO (Feb 25, 2012)

TWO TEEEEERRRRRRMS!!!!!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

TheYoungTurks kinda kept telling me Obama would win by a landslide...Either way America loses because Obama sucks too its just that he's the lesser of two evils between him and Romney.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

*Yahoo.com -* President Barack Obama handily defeated Gov. Mitt Romney and won himself a second term Tuesday after a bitter and historically expensive race that was primarily fought in just a handful of battleground states. Networks project that Obama beat Romney after nabbing the crucial state of Ohio.
The Romney campaign's last-ditch attempt to put blue-leaning Midwestern swing states in play failed as Obama's Midwestern firewall sent the president back to the White House for four more years. Obama picked up the swing states of New Hampshire, Michigan, New Mexico, Iowa, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, and Ohio. Florida and Virginia are still too close to call, but even if he won them, they would not give Romney enough Electoral College votes to put him over the top. The popular vote will most likely be much narrower than the president's Electoral College victory.
The Obama victory marks an end to a years-long campaign that saw historic advertisement spending levels, countless rallies and speeches, and three much-watched debates.
The Romney campaign cast the election as a referendum on Obama's economic policies, frequently comparing him to former President Jimmy Carter and asking voters the Reagan-esque question of whether they are better off than they were four years ago. But the Obama campaign pushed back on the referendum framing, blanketing key states such as Ohio early on with ads painting him as a multimillionaire more concerned with profits than people. The Obama campaign also aggressively attacked Romney on reproductive rights issues, tying Romney to a handful of Republican candidates who made controversial comments about rape and abortion.
These ads were one reason Romney faced a steep likeability problem for most of the race, until his expert performance at the first presidential debate in Denver in October. After that debate, and a near universal panning of Obama's performance, Romney caught up with Obama in national polls, and almost closed his favoribility gap with the president. In polls, voters consistently gave him an edge over Obama on who would handle the economy better and create more jobs, even as they rated Obama higher on caring about the middle class.
But the president's Midwestern firewall--and the campaign's impressive grassroots operation--carried him through. Ohio tends to vote a bit more Republican than the nation as a whole, but Obama was able to stave off that trend and hold an edge there over Romney, perhaps due to the president's support of the auto bailout three years ago. Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan all but moved to Ohio in the last weeks of the campaign, trying and ultimately failing to erase Obama's lead there.
A shrinking electoral battleground this year meant that only 14 states were really seen as in play, and both candidates spent most of their time and money there. Though national polls showed the two candidates in a dead heat, Obama consistently held a lead in the states that mattered. That, and his campaign's much-touted get out the vote efforts and overall ground game, may be what pushed Obama over the finish line.
Now, Obama heads back to office facing what will most likely be bitterly partisan negotiations over whether the Bush tax cuts should expire. The House will still be majority Republican, with Democrats maintaining their majority in the Senate.
The loss may provoke some soul searching in the Republican Party. This election was seen as a prime opportunity to unseat Obama, as polls showed Americans were unhappy with a sluggish economy, sky-high unemployment, and a health care reform bill that remained widely unpopular. Romney took hardline positions on immigration, federal spending, and taxes during the long Republican primary when he faced multiple challenges from the right. He later shifted to the center in tone on many of those issues, but it's possible the primary painted him into a too-conservative corner to appeal to moderates during the general election. The candidate also at times seemed unable to effectively counter Democratic attacks on his business experience and personal wealth.



-----


Chris Christie is my bet for 2016


----------



## virus21 (Sep 22, 2009)

TripleG said:


> So the contest of the lesser evils is over?
> 
> Good. Can we end this mindless stupidity with the ads & the media coverage now. I am beyond sick of it after months of this crap.


Probably the only good thing about this day


----------



## ManiacMichaelMyers (Oct 23, 2009)

TripleG said:


> So the contest of the lesser evils is over?
> 
> Good. Can we end this mindless stupidity with the ads & the media coverage now. I am beyond sick of it after months of this crap.


For real. I don't even have TV service but YouTube has been fucked up with the political ads too. 

Still glad it wasn't Romney who won. Give Obama the 2 terms to try to fix the mess that was left for him because 1 isn't enough for anyone.


----------



## Dice Darwin (Sep 7, 2010)

Gandhi said:


> TheYoungTurks kinda kept telling me Obama would win by a landslide...Either way America loses because Obama sucks too its just that he's the lesser of two evils between him and Romney.


TYT is very Democrat biased. Cenk even has admitted it. They'll criticize democrats too at times, but all things being even, they'll always take the Democrats side. 

And yes, we lose regardless. Just like last election with McCain and Obama. 

It's almost as if the Republicans are tanking elections on purpose.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

I have some family in Indiana, and they are mad Mourdock lost his seat in the election. Mourdock was famous for saying that rape was God intended. I have some hardcore christian family members, I hate them all.


----------



## ABrown (Jan 30, 2007)




----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Diane Sawyer being sloshed as all fuck is making my damn day. This woman is awesome.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Fox News real mad cause Romney winning popular vote.:lol


----------



## Scissor Me Daddy-O!! (Apr 13, 2011)

anyone else hearing about the Donald Trump tweets? Totally bashing Obama winning. kind of funny, but really sad and pathetic as well.


----------



## TomahawkJock (Jun 19, 2012)

Bush won Electoral but not Popular in 2000. How's it feel to be on the other side of the boat Republicans? Not good eh? Deal with it.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Myers said:


> I have some family in Indiana, and they are mad Mourdock lost his seat in the election. Mourdock was famous for saying that rape was God intended. I have some hardcore christian family members, I hate them all.


Is he the same fucknut who said that the body has ways to get rid of a fetus conceived by rape?


----------



## ABrown (Jan 30, 2007)




----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Romney headquarters is funeral silent.:lmao

This is crazy. I'm calling some of my ignorant family to tell them to shut the fuck up and be nice tomorrow morning at work.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

lol yeah Repubs not taking this well at all.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Ron Paul 2016? Come on America!


----------



## itssoeasy23 (Jul 19, 2011)

Gandhi said:


> Ron Paul 2016? Come on America!


Let's hope.


----------



## TomahawkJock (Jun 19, 2012)

Obama takes lead in Popular vote. Uh oh. Poor Fox.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

I'm marking out at all this black music playing at Obama headquarters.:lol

Fox News moving on to other topics to discuss. They mad.


----------



## Ray (Mar 13, 2011)

:lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


----------



## ManiacMichaelMyers (Oct 23, 2009)

Headliner said:


> I'm marking out at all this black music playing at Obama headquarters.:lol
> 
> Fox News moving on to other topics to discuss. They mad.


I noticed that too. It's probably like salt in Fox's wounds.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

:lmao Awesome.

OBAMA IS THE SHIT *****


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Why won't Romney come out? :troll


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Gandhi said:


> Ron Paul 2016? Come on America!


He would be what 100? lol


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

Good job America for making the right decision. Thanks for making FOX news cry.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

MethHardy said:


> He would be what 100? lol


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

MethHardy said:


> He would be what 100? lol


I know plenty of old ass people who would be better presidents than shitbags like Obama or Romney.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Headliner said:


> I'm marking out at all this black music playing at Obama headquarters.:lol
> 
> Fox News moving on to other topics to discuss. They mad.


I'm diggin' it like crazy! They were playing Shalamar, The Whispers, Frankie Beverly & Maze, Jackson 5, Stevie Wonder! Fox said *Austin Voice* "UH UH"!!!! 
Fox is cracking me up HARD!!!!!:lmao:lmao:lmao



Jon Jones said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


MITT ROMNEY, YOU CAN SLEEP TIGHT, BITCH! :lmao:lmao:lmao made me cry:lmao:lmao


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Human Nature said:


> I'm diggin' it like crazy! They were playing Frankie Beverly & Maze, Jackson 5, Stevie Wonder! Fox said *Austin Voice* "UH UH"!!!!
> Fox is cracking me up HARD!!!!!:lmao:lmao:lmao


YES!!! I thought they were going to bus out a soul train line next! 

Fox is crazy hilarious. Karl Rove won't give up.


----------



## holt_hogan (Jun 28, 2011)

Gandhi said:


> Why won't Romney come out? :troll


Ann's looking at Black porn.


----------



## dan the marino (Oct 22, 2006)

Not too surprised with Obama winning. I'm okay with that, too.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

:lmao :lmao


----------



## blur (Sep 6, 2012)

DON TRUMP MAD


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

washington and colordo legalize weed wow. wish my state did that.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Gandhi said:


> Why won't Romney come out? :troll


let him have time , its hard and he may not have got my vote but i dothink he was a good guy . all love for Romney . he was just not the best guy for the job at this point who cares about that . hope the best for Romney.




I am gonna cry when I see Obama so I just better go to bed and not ruin my macho image! #OBAMA2012


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Headliner said:


> YES!!! I thought they were going to bus out a soul train line next!
> 
> Fox is crazy hilarious. Karl Rove won't give up.


Aw man, if a few people got on stage and they had a line set up and the first family came out dancing!!! Oh shit, I would mark like never before!!!!! Obama going all out in his 2nd term! :lmao

He did tell Key and Peele that he can't be very comedic or loose cause he's not in his 2nd term yet.
I would mark if he came out and was like "That's right, BIIITTTCCCHHHEEEZZZZ!!!!" :lmao:lmao:lmao
"The President of America"
"Which America?"
"North America"
"The United States of America??"
Chris Rock got it right back in 2003! :lmao


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)




----------



## dan the marino (Oct 22, 2006)

Legalizing weed and gay marriage, a little bit at a time.

And lol @ Trump. He mad.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Trump is nuts!!!!! He's trying to incite a civil war. what a sore loser.


----------



## BigWillie54 (Feb 1, 2011)

Jon Jones said:


> :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao :lmao


****** fucking shit up for black people? Not shocked

Sent from my MB612 using VerticalSports.Com App


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Headliner said:


> :lmao :lmao


Oh my Lord!!!:lmao:lmao:lmao:lmao

That crowd is SOOOOOO quiet!!!:lmao:lmao
Here comes R MONEY wit dem tears!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

ROFL at Trump,Jesus this is hilarious.


----------



## ABrown (Jan 30, 2007)

Headliner said:


> :lmao :lmao


:lmao SAY IT WITCHA CHEST!!!!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

I thought Romney would cry or something.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

I was waiting for Romney to be like TO ARMS MY FOLLOWERS. CIVIL WAR BITCHES.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

I actually like what Romney said. All of that needs to happen. Working together.


----------



## zxLegionxz (Nov 23, 2011)

Good job to the guys that voted nice to see a decent guy running your country good choice 

US

Marijuana is now legal in 3 states and gay marriage in 4 Congrats!!! to all people that voted


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Those two swag ass Asian dudes dancing in Chicago killed me. :lmao




Headliner said:


> :lmao :lmao



Everybody go night night *****!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

zxLegionxz said:


> Good job to the guys that voted nice to see a decent guy running your country good choice
> 
> US
> 
> Marijuana is now legal in 3 states and gay marriage in 4 Congrats!!! to all people that voted


Yeah,I guess Obama winning is somewhat positive because I love my fucking weed.


----------



## Panzer (May 31, 2007)

Me after reading conservative friends FB statuses.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Human Nature said:


> I actually like what Romney said. All of that needs to happen. Working together.


YA IT WAS GOOD !!!


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

The music they're playing is what can be heard at every Black family reunion or on any given Sunday afternoon.


----------



## A$AP (Jul 24, 2012)

OBAMA STILL IN THIS BITCH UHHHHHHHHH


----------



## Clique (Sep 9, 2007)

bama

Lol @ Kevin Hart, Fox News, and Trump.

I would have went down to McCormick Place if I didn't work tonight. I'm good watching it on TV, though. Looks like a SOUL party!


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Amber B said:


> The music they're playing is what can be heard at every Black family reunion or on any given Sunday afternoon.


Or on my iPod fa' sho! 
I want to be there simply for the fact of the music they get to jam out to! :lmao:lmao
Then Obama to come out and lock with bell bottoms on!:lmao


----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

zxLegionxz said:


> Good job to the guys that voted nice to see a decent guy running your country good choice
> 
> US
> 
> Marijuana is now legal in 3 states and gay marriage in 4 Congrats!!! to all people that voted


Slowly but surely.. We'll make it to the 21st century sooner or later.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Michelle can dance too. I bet the after party gonna be crazy.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

Mess. :lmao


----------



## A$AP (Jul 24, 2012)

They're gunna have intercourse.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Did anybody here actually think Romney had a chance of winning? Seriously lol.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

The Great Below said:


> Slowly but surely.. We'll make it to the 21st century sooner or later.


This here. We're finally heading in the right direction. Hopefully we'll stay on this path, which I'm sure we will.


Alright Obama, c'mon now! I gotta get my car fixed early in the morning ($450 down the drain) and go to work.
Get out there already. Or you're about to go on my "Jive Turkey List"! :lol:


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

TehJerichoFan said:


> Mess. :lmao


HOLY CRAP!!!!! YES YES YES YES YES YES!!!!!!

ANYTIME I mention Chalk Zone everyone gives me a "What are you talking about" look! Pisses me off!
Easily one of the best theme songs to a cartoon too! Up there with "Dark Wing Duck" "Goof Troop" and other classic themes!


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

More black music. Fuck this, I'm about to bus a move.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

He's already loosening up cause he's got this secured! "....We gotta fix that"


----------



## Clique (Sep 9, 2007)

Headliner said:


> More black music. Fuck this, I'm about to bus a move.


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Barack and Michelle are getting it in tonight.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Clique said:


>


I was just watching that video.:lmao


Amber B said:


> Barack and Michelle are getting it in tonight.


The kids are going to be with the grandparents tonight. They about to throw on some R.Kelly, Maxwell, turn on the neo blue light. Shit's going down.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

I enjoy reading all these optimistic posts from you guys about going to the right direction even though I'm one oft he biggest pessimists I know,Lol.


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Those promo skills, though. Damn.


----------



## sjones8 (Jan 31, 2011)

Barack did his thing tonight.

To be truthful, this was one of the most craziest political seasons I have ever witnessed. From Clint talking to a chair to Mitt's 47% statement. It was wild.

I can't wait for 2016.


----------



## ~Humanity~ (Jul 23, 2007)

Wow that victory speech is going to withstand the test of time. Watching a lot of MLK videos for my studies and that definitely gave me the same feel!


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Amber B said:


> Those promo skills, though. Damn.


This. I was waiting for him to grab the mic and start pacing around like a wrestler. :lmao
He was on point tonight!

:lmao:lmao:lmao who is this kid with the high top fade????:lmao:lmao:lmao


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

*Barack Obama* 'WE'VE GOT MORE WORK TO DO'


- President Barack Obama rode a wave of broad support from minorities, women and moderates to win re-election Tuesday by defeating Republican challenger Mitt Romney in Democratic strongholds and key battleground states.


----------



## charmed1 (Jul 16, 2011)

That was an amazing speech. I am Canadian and I have never been prouder of my American neighbours.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

charmed1 said:


> That was an amazing speech. I am Canadian and I have never been prouder of my American neighbours.




Romney speech was good too. i am proud of American too.Tonight was a win for all .

big win that put a stop too the #waronwomen and gays and the Latinos

in the next 4 years we need to end the war in afghanistan and do what ever we can to *NOT* go to way with WHO ever we may not see eye to eye on , dont care if they kill 4 of our people war is a last ditch call.

id hate to know some one killed me and we go to war for it 

i am just one man and we are bigger thin that or we need to be.

At time we need to just let stuff go i don't care how hard that it is . in no way is saying your sorry ever bad !

too my point i am sorry if i ever rub some of you a bad way!! i am a Barack Obama backer i hope you saw what i saw in the guy some 6 year ago if not im sorry. as he said "despite all our differences, most of us share certain hopes for America's future. We want our kids to grow up in a country where they have access to the best schools and the best teachers.

OBAMA: We want our children to live in an America that isn't burdened by debt, that isn't weakened by inequality, that isn't threatened by the destructive power of a warming planet.
(APPLAUSE)
We want to pass on a country that's safe and respected and admired around the world, a nation that is defended by the strongest military on earth and the best troops this -- this world has ever known.
(APPLAUSE)
But also a country that moves with confidence beyond this time of war, to shape a peace that is built on the promise of freedom and dignity for every human being. We believe in a generous America, in a compassionate America, in a tolerant America, open to the dreams of an immigrant's daughter who studies in our schools and pledges to our flag."


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

Can't lie, that speech was amazing. Felt like MLK talking through him or some shit, gotta give Obama props.


----------



## Baldwin. (Nov 5, 2006)

Holy cow, what a victory promo from Obama.


----------



## CHIcagoMade (Feb 28, 2009)

DAT speech, DAT pop, DAT atmosphere... DAMN!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

....How old is Obama's daughter? I aint talking about the kid.


----------



## CHIcagoMade (Feb 28, 2009)

Gandhi said:


> ....How old is Obama's daughter? I aint talking about the kid.


She about 13 or 14 Bruh :jordan


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

CHIcagoMade95 said:


> She about 13 or 14 Bruh :jordan



ep


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

Gandhi said:


> ep














Also, FUCK YEAH MOVING TO COLORADO.


----------



## MOX (Dec 6, 2011)




----------



## joshL (Oct 29, 2012)

I voted for Romney and am a conservative BUT I do hope we finally get together as a nation and in Washington. We have big problems and hope Dems and Reps can come together. Republicans clearly have a problem. This map looks exactly the same as it did 8 years ago. They didn't do a great job with latinos and other groups.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Striketeam said:


> Also, FUCK YEAH MOVING TO COLORADO.












The girl on the very right...She's 12? I swear to whatever the fuck is up there she looks like most of the 18 year old chicks around here in Egypt.How the fuck is she 12?


----------



## li/<o (Jan 18, 2009)

joshL said:


> I voted for Romney and am a conservative BUT I do hope we finally get together as a nation and in Washington. We have big problems and hope Dems and Reps can come together. Republicans clearly have a problem. This map looks exactly the same as it did 8 years ago. They didn't do a great job with latinos and other groups.


I agree enough is enough with there stupid shit we need to get on track and start fixing economy. Some of the no brainers is getting out of other countries and returning our troops back to the nation. Try to rely on ourselfs instead of getting every product from China and manufacture here to keep the jobs here. There is so much they can do, but they don't work together and the solution isnt printing money like Bush's and Obamas term if we do the same thing again I am afraid the dollar will literally become a peso.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

*note i put this map on this site some 4 weeks ago just saying!!*


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Gandhi said:


> The girl on the very right...She's 12? I swear to whatever the fuck is up there she looks like most of the 18 year old chicks around here in Egypt.How the fuck is she 12?


We need to see the birth certificate.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> We need to see the birth certificate.


ummmmm no she looks 12 (freaking me out a bit !! )


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Actually she's 14. But that's not relevant to anything.


----------



## HHHGame78 (Mar 2, 2004)

"And together with your help and God's grace we will continue our journey forward"

Sorry Mr. President but adding "God's grace" in there just under minded everything you just said. He's implying we can't do this w/o "God". Pathetic really.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

Until American has a Three or More Party System ,It will be the same old stuff.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

So glad Obama won!


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

I said mitt never stood a chance. The MSM just says the polls are close! for good ratings. They wanted a tight race to make it interesting when in reality nate silver predicted this landslide awhile ago.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

HHHGame78 said:


> "And together with your help and God's grace we will continue our journey forward"
> 
> Sorry Mr. President but adding "God's grace" in there just under minded everything you just said. He's implying we can't do this w/o "God". Pathetic really.


He's simply kissing ass to the country's majority,Same old shit really.


----------



## HHHGame78 (Mar 2, 2004)

Gandhi said:


> He's simply kissing ass to the country's majority,Same old shit really.


Exactly, but just because something is in the Majority doesn't make it right. Slavery for example.


----------



## Cliffy (Mar 31, 2011)

Where's King of the World ?

He was certain Romney would win.


----------



## blur (Sep 6, 2012)

Hmmm. What will Romney do now?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

I hope the Tea Party gets cleared out now. Obama couldn't get anything through with the Tea Party there. Obama 2012 baby!


----------



## Heel (Feb 11, 2006)




----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Heel said:


>


Stupid cunts.


----------



## MOX (Dec 6, 2011)

Heel said:


>


"Can we start with the islamisation of America, because I wrote a song about it."

:lmao


----------



## El Barto (Jun 28, 2011)

This drunk bitch is PISSED Obama won. I can't make the vid show up like everyone else but this shit is funny as fuck. http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw


----------



## MOX (Dec 6, 2011)

Antho10000 said:


> This drunk bitch is PISSED Obama won. I can't make the vid show up like everyone else but this shit is funny as fuck. http://youtu.be/wLoqti0lzAw


This is actually hilarious. It's a shame we can't see her but oh my gosh THE RAGE.


----------



## UnsungZer0 (Nov 21, 2009)

Just tryna remember Romney as he once was...


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Its a good day to wear Obama shirts if you're in Florida.

Edit : Or atleast if you want to die.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> I said mitt never stood a chance. The MSM just says the polls are close! for good ratings. They wanted a tight race to make it interesting when in reality nate silver predicted this landslide awhile ago.


It was close. Virginia, Ohio, Florida, and Colorado were all extremely close and could have easily gone to Romney as well. If a couple thousand or so votes swung in the other way, we would be having President Romney right now and the sheep would be without their leader.

The electoral college doesn't show how close the race really was.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

TehBlackGamer said:


> Just tryna remember Romney as he once was...


I still don't understand this, can someone please explain it to me?

Congrats to Obama though.


----------



## The Ice King (Nov 9, 2009)

Never listening to anyone but Nate Silver again.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> It was close. Virginia, Ohio, Florida, and Colorado were all extremely close and could have easily gone to Romney as well. If a couple thousand or so votes swung in the other way, we would be having President Romney right now and the sheep would be without their leader.
> 
> The electoral college doesn't show how close the race really was.


You mad.


----------



## GothicBohemian (May 26, 2012)

From an election night entertainment perspective, I'd have a liked a closer contest but politically, an Obama win was a good as it could get (IMO, of course). Problem is, the House and Senate situations haven't much changed, so basically a whole lot of time and money was put toward not much change at all. Good luck to him on another four years of constant attempts at compromise. 

It's unfortunate that third party and independent candidates don't have more viability in the US but then again, vote splitting across multiple choices has cause some crazy situations elsewhere (like here in Canada, for example) so there's that plus to staying with the big two, I guess. I'd just like to see more variety than middle sorta left and right leaning a bit to the middle.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

PunkSE316 said:


> You mad.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Any day Karl Rove cries on TV, I'll call it a win.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> You mad.


I'm just stating a fact. Glad to see you lack reading comprehension though.

It seems that the Ron Paul people really DID cost Romney the election.

In Ohio, Romney lost by 29,897 and in the primaries, Paul received 111,238 votes. 

In Florida, Romney lost by 48,262 votes and in the primaries, Paul received 117,100 votes.

In Virginia, Romney lost by 106,726 votes and in the primaries there, Paul received 107,480 votes.

In New Hampshire, Romney lost by 34,918 votes and in the primaries, Paul received 56,848 votes.

Iowa is also a very liberty friendly state as well, and the backlash against Romney there because of how the GOP treated the Paul delegates at the convention might have just cost him in all of these states.

Beware of the backlash against Brother Rand in his attempt in 2016. You know damn well they will make the Libertarians the scapegoat in an attempt to blame everybody but themselves.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Maybe people just don't want crazy right wing nutters anymore? Romney wasn't exactly a "right wing nutter" but he is/was a sellout, he could've been something different for the Republicans (not that I would have cared due to me being left wing) but Romney had to bend over backwards for the Tea Party people. Obama won, deal with it.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

The Republicans are the engineers of their own unhappiness. Instead of cultivating people like Jon Huntsman in the primaries - I disagree with him on just about everything, but I respect him for knowing his ass from a hole in the ground - they lead with the fringest Tea Party candidates to appeal to the base. When it became perfectly clear those guys would never get the independents and the swing voters, they were left with Romney. 



PunkSE316 said:


> Maybe people just don't want crazy right wing nutters anymore? Romney wasn't exactly a "right wing nutter" but he is/was a sellout, he could've been something different for the Republicans (not that I would have cared due to me being left wing) but Romney had to bend over backwards for the Tea Party people.


Basically, this. It was even worse in 08, when a sensible Republican like John McCain - who I actually respected before the election - was forced to pander to the worst elements of the conservative party, when he had a track record of being moderate and reaching across the aisle.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Asenath said:


> The Republicans are the engineers of their own unhappiness. Instead of cultivating people like Jon Huntsman in the primaries - I disagree with him on just about everything, but I respect him for knowing his ass from a hole in the ground - they lead with the fringest Tea Party candidates to appeal to the base. When it became perfectly clear those guys would never get the independents and the swing voters, they were left with Romney.
> 
> 
> 
> Basically, this. It was even worse in 08, when a sensible Republican like John McCain - who I actually respected before the election - was forced to pander to the worst elements of the conservative party, when he had a track record of being moderate and reaching across the aisle.


Yeah dude, exactly..like I could never EVER vote right wing in my life but McCain..I've always had high respect for him, but to me, he always struck me more as an Independent or even Left wing rather than Right wing. It is so messed up how the Tea Party is still in control of some parts of Congress and may be for the next couple of elections. 

The Republicans will need to figure out a solution asap to be any chance of winning an election. The Tea Party people need to go from the Republican party. Who knows, maybe in the next election, the Independents will finally stand up.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

Great a moderate Conservative just beat out a more Conservative Republican. Obama is hardly a liberal president, and that's not his fault. Democrats are hardly liberals. I will say that I am more glad Obama beat out Romney because Willard is the last thing we need at the State of the Unions addresses for the next 4 years. That man will put a room full of insomniacs high on Meth, Cocaine, and LSD to sleep.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> Maybe people just don't want crazy right wing nutters anymore? Romney wasn't exactly a "right wing nutter" but he is/was a sellout, he could've been something different for the Republicans (not that I would have cared due to me being left wing) but Romney had to bend over backwards for the Tea Party people. Obama won, deal with it.


Did you even read the numbers I posted? You're acting as if it was a blowout, but when you look at the voting totals for the deciding states, it could have easily gone for Romney and probably would have had he not alienated Libertarian voters with how he and the GOP Establishment treated Ron Paul at the convention. If HALF of the people who voted for Ron Paul in the Ohio GOP primary voted for Romney in the election, he would have won Ohio and the same goes for Florida. He also could have won states like Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado and Virginia, all of which are pretty liberty friendly states, had he not acted the way he did at the GOP convention. If karma exists, then this is a prime example of it, as the man who the GOP treated like dirt ended up costing Romney the election.

The Tea Party actually wasn't totally awful when it first begun, but it was over-taken by the Neo-Conservatives and the Republican establishment, as they started associating the Tea Party with candidates like Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Michelle Bachmann, all of whom didn't represent what the Tea Party represented when they first started.

The solution for the Republican party would be to become more Libertarian and less ultra-Conservative, as that turns a hell of a lot of voters off. Rand Paul would be the perfect candidate for the Republicans in 2016, as he doesn't shove his religion down people's throat, is for ending the wars, balancing the budget, is for ending the drug war, and doesn't want the government making decisions when it comes to sensitives issues like marriage. If the Republicans put up someone like Marco Rubio or Paul Ryan in 2016, it will show that they haven't learned a damn thing in the last eight years.

Oh, and McCain was awful. He was more war-hawkish than both Obama and Romney combined. If he was President then we would probably already be in Iran and probably getting ready to send troops to Syria. If I was eligible to vote then, I would have voted for Obama over him. McCain would have tanked America even more.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Did you even read the numbers I posted? You're acting as if it was a blowout, but when you look at the voting totals for the deciding states, it could have easily gone for Romney and probably would have had he not alienated Libertarian voters with how he and the GOP Establishment treated Ron Paul at the convention. If HALF of the people who voted for Ron Paul in the Ohio GOP primary voted for Romney in the election, he would have won Ohio and the same goes for Florida. He also could have won states like Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado and Virginia, all of which are pretty liberty friendly states, had he not acted the way he did at the GOP convention. If karma exists, then this is a prime example of it, as the man who the GOP treated like dirt ended up costing Romney the election.
> 
> The Tea Party actually wasn't totally awful when it first begun, but it was over-taken by the Neo-Conservatives and the Republican establishment, as they started associating the Tea Party with candidates like Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Michelle Bachmann, all of whom didn't represent what the Tea Party represented when they first started.
> 
> ...


You aren't even giving any credit to Barack Obama for pulling off a victory when people like yourself said that Romney would win by a good margin. Go away. You are clearly a troll and an odd fellow, please..just stop trolling, it's quite pathetic.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

PunkSE316 said:


> You aren't even giving any credit to Barack Obama for pulling off a victory when people like yourself said that Romney would win by a good margin. Go away. You are clearly a troll and an odd fellow, please..just stop trolling, it's quite pathetic.


When did I say Romney would win by a "good" margin outside of the two or so satire posts I did to mock what the Neo-Conservatives? I was saying throughout the final days that this election would be close, which it was, and the difference was the Libertarians that Romney alienated. If Romney didn't alienate Libertarian voters, he would have won Florida, Ohio, New Hampshire, and probably Virginia, which would have won him the Presidency. Romney treating Ron Paul like dirt ended up being his fatal mistake.

Am I denying that Obama won? Absolutely not. However, what I am saying is that Romney would have won had he not pissed off the Libertarians and, as shown by the numbers I posted, I'm right.

Not sure where you get the "troll" accusation from. Outside of the two or so satire posts, I've been saying the same thing throughout the thread. 

Have an open mind, brother.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

I disagree. The states that you mentioned have a good Liberal history ever since Clinton changed the mould back in 1992. You can say "If Romney didn't treat Paul like dirt, he would have won" Come on now..liberals would have somewhat of an equal stronghold or if not more of a stronghold.

I have an open mind..how can you say that without even knowing me? I'm pro choice, all for legalising weed, gay marriage should be legal, the rich should get taxed more to spread the wealth etc. 

Obama winning was a pretty awesome moment. Romney seems like a moderate okay dude that sold himself out but Paul Ryan seems like a loopy right winger.

I really can't see much happening in Washington unless the Tea Party goes away..and more moderate Republicans step in so it'll be easier for Obama and the other Democrats to negotiate with them, just for the good of the people. It needs to happen.

You can say all you want about what if's but wow, everyone here in Australia has been ecstatic about the Obama victory, such an awesome speech and a feel good moment which will carry on in to many feel good moments for the next four years!

Now it's time to help the people.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Ron Paul stands for a policy of 'everyone do what the fuck you want, its not my business'

Something I believe we can all get behind with the government poking their nose into every little issue

Legalising pot, abortion, marriage is not the federal government's concern and it is instead being left to the people on a state level

So yeah, those are some pretty loopy ideas. Damn you founding fathers you wackos


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Redead said:


> Ron Paul stands for a policy of 'everyone do what the fuck you want, its not my business'
> 
> Something I believe we can all get behind with the government poking their nose into every little issue
> 
> ...


I called Paul Ryan "loopy".


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

I disagree on that. States like Virginia, Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Colorado are all pretty mixed on the their political affiliation, as they usually tend to be pretty close each election and aren't committed to one party like states such as Texas, California, and New York. The Libertarian vote was the difference in most of those states, as evident by the numbers I posted. They either A) Didn't vote, B) Voted for a third party, C) Voted for Obama out of spite for how Romney treated Paul, or D) Wrote in Ron Paul or someone else to stick it to the two party system. I highly doubt any real Libertarian voted for Romney in this election after how the GOP Convention was conducted. 

The problem in Washington is that both parties are going so far to their side of the political spectrum that it is impossible for either side to work with the other even if they wanted to. The far right won't work with the far left and vice versa, as they would never come to a compromise. Even if someone does decide to work with the other side, they have to worry about their own elections and the opposing candidates will paint them as either "Not a true Conservative" or "Not a true Progressive" and they will lose in their parties' primary.

The political system in America is beyond screwed at the moment, so I don't get why people are getting so excited about the potential of Obama accomplishing anything. The only time he really got something done was when he had the majority in both the House AND the Senate, and the Democrats won't have the majority in the House until at least 2016 barring a huge shift in 2014. Unless he abuses the hell out of Executive Orders, he isn't going to accomplish much. Partisan Gridlock in Washington will be the story of Obama's second term imo.

EDIT- Paul Ryan was influenced by the right people at least, as he apparently is a big fan of the works of people like Ludwig Von Misses and FA Hayek, the same people who influenced Ron Paul. Damn shame his policies are almost the exact opposite of what those men wrote about. I'd say that there is a slight chance he wakes up to what is going on, but he seems to be a victim of the political machine.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Ryan's nuts

Anyone who says they base their philosophy on Atlas Shrugged is makes me feel uneasy


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Redead said:


> Ryan's nuts
> 
> Anyone who says they base their philosophy on Atlas Shrugged is makes me feel uneasy


Yeah, no doubt.

Ryan is one of those neo con/right wing wackos. 

The Tea Party affiliation from the Republican Party needs to go away for them to be any chance, not that I care but eh..

I've got a real good feeling about the next four years..it will be a bit of a bumpy road for a bit but things will get better.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Redead said:


> Ron Paul stands for a policy of 'everyone do what the fuck you want, its not my business'
> 
> Something I believe we can all get behind with the government poking their nose into every little issue
> 
> ...


People will just be abandoning states they don't agree with. I bet a lot of them would die off like the conservative states. Liberals would leave and wouldn't want their taxes keeping them up anymore since they are the biggest welfare states already.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

I heard that the President's response to Hurricane Sandy really helped sway votes on Obama's side.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

PunkSE316 said:


> Yeah, no doubt.
> 
> Ryan is one of those neo con/right wing wackos.
> 
> ...


They're too stubborn so they're not going anywhere anytime soon. 








These numbers alone prove that the Republicans' current ideology has alienated too many people.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> People will just be abandoning states they don't agree with. I bet a lot of them would die off like the conservative states. Liberals would leave and wouldn't want their taxes keeping them up anymore since they are the biggest welfare states already.


I do not see a problem with this. If someone wants to move because a state isn't providing them with what they want, they're allowed to move. Free will, ya know?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

GOON The Legend said:


> I do not see a problem with this. If someone wants to move because a state isn't providing them with what they want, they're allowed to move. Free will, ya know?


So do those same states have a right to complain when their economy suffers because a lot of their money is moving to more socially progressive states?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> *I disagree on that. States like Virginia, Ohio, Florida, New Hampshire, Iowa, and Colorado are all pretty mixed on the their political affiliation, as they usually tend to be pretty close each election and aren't committed to one party like states such as Texas, California, and New York. The Libertarian vote was the difference in most of those states, as evident by the numbers I posted. They either A) Didn't vote, B) Voted for a third party, C) Voted for Obama out of spite for how Romney treated Paul, or D) Wrote in Ron Paul or someone else to stick it to the two party system. I highly doubt any real Libertarian voted for Romney in this election after how the GOP Convention was conducted. *
> 
> The problem in Washington is that both parties are going so far to their side of the political spectrum that it is impossible for either side to work with the other even if they wanted to. The far right won't work with the far left and vice versa, as they would never come to a compromise. Even if someone does decide to work with the other side, they have to worry about their own elections and the opposing candidates will paint them as either "Not a true Conservative" or "Not a true Progressive" and they will lose in their parties' primary.
> 
> ...


Or maybe they just voted for Obama because they don't like right wing wackos who associate themselves with gun wackos, born again wackos and rich corporate wackos. You do know those people could be left wing, right? You don't seem too bad but don't fall for Paul Ryan, he is just bullshitting people...just like how he said he liked Rage Against The Machine, how the fuck would he not know the message from De La Rocha and co? Lol!

I hope things go well for Obama but the Tea Party nutters will try everything to block off Obama. Obama has done well considering the mess he has had to put up with from Bush and co.

It's going to be a bit before everything is cleaned up or somewhat minimized and then fixed up later on..I'm 110% behind Obama.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

I don't think you get it. Liberal states will band together and become like socialist Europe while conservative states will regress and become like iran. It would be a mess and destroy the union.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

California and new york are already exteremely liberal states that are basically like Europe anyways. huge driving economies with their own rules and policies that might as well be their own countries due to their sheer influence

Majority of states shift between lib and con as can be seen over the elections, dont see how it changes everything too much


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

kobra860 said:


> So do those same states have a right to complain when their economy suffers because a lot of their money is moving to more socially progressive states?


Nope, because they made the choice to stay behind and they would suffer the consequences. Thing is, it would probably never come to that because the Governor's of those states would realize that they're losing people to other states, and change things to make it more appealing so the people who live there don't leave.



PunkSE316 said:


> Or maybe they just voted for Obama because they don't like right wing wackos who associate themselves with gun wackos, born again wackos and rich corporate wackos. You do know those people could be left wing, right? You don't seem too bad but don't fall for Paul Ryan, he is just bullshitting people...just like how he said he liked Rage Against The Machine, how the fuck would he not know the message from De La Rocha and co? Lol!
> 
> I hope things go well for Obama but the Tea Party nutters will try everything to block off Obama. Obama has done well considering the mess he has had to put up with from Bush and co.
> 
> It's going to be a bit before everything is cleaned up or somewhat minimized and then fixed up later on..I'm 110% behind Obama.


When you mention the people who "could be left wing", are you talking about the people who voted for Ron Paul in the primaries, or Libertarians in general? If so, then those two are one in the same. Libertarians disliked Obama, and probably would have voted for Romney if push came to shove, although that was thrown out of the window after the GOP Convention. Outside of just spite, I doubt any Libertarian would have voted for Obama in the election, as he is against nearly (if not) everything they believe.

I saw a clip a couple of years ago and it was from a 2008 Presidential Debate. Paul was talking about something (think it was foreign policy) and Romney quipped in by saying that he's been "reading too much of Ahmadinejad's press releases" or whatever. Paul come back by saying "Yeah, make fun buddy" or something along those lines. Funny how the joke seems to be on Romney now for treating Paul like dirt.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

If RP was elected and states rights prevail are they allowed to leave the union when they want? 
Welcome to Alabama now owned by China. Enjoy your stay.


----------



## HullKogan (Feb 22, 2010)

I voted for Gary Johnson yesterday.

The problem is the two-party dictatorship.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MethHardy said:


> If RP was elected and states rights prevail are they allowed to leave the union when they want?
> Welcome to Alabama now owned by China. Enjoy your stay.


Yes, but they would never do it, as the federal government still has enough power delegated to them by the Constitution that is good for the states. Problem is that the federal government, by getting involved in marriage, drug usage, and other issues is complete overreach. Read the tenth amendment.

You're taking the argument to the extreme, as a state would NEVER secede unless they were all to do it in unison like the South did during the Civil War and even then that would never happen again. Like Redead said, only about two states even have the capability of surviving on their own.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

I know I am taking the argument to the extreme. I'm just asking is it possible. It's scary to think about.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

HullKogan said:


> I voted for Gary Johnson yesterday.
> 
> The problem is the two-party dictatorship.


It would be nice if the GOP split in two and become the libertarian party and conservative party with both being big players.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Well Texas basically considers seceding every other week nowadays


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

What the...so Obama only won according to you on the basis of people voting for Ron Paul? LOL.

Anyways, I've been celebrating with everyone for most of the day so I'm off to bed because it's like close to 4am here in Australia. Take care everyone


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

You're not even a yank?

Then why are you so happy Obama won? Its a decision with marginal at best effect on you.

If anything you should be considered about the witch who stole the prime minister seat


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Redead said:


> California and new york are already exteremely liberal states that are basically like Europe anyways.


Good.


----------



## Choke2Death (Jul 26, 2011)

Not an American so it doesn't really concern me or anything, but I would have voted Obama had I been there. A big congratulations to him for winning another four years.


----------



## Sephiroth (May 27, 2006)

bama


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

So beautiful to see all the neocon meltdowns.

That said, I wonder when reality will set back in for the American public and they realize that there's no real change coming in the next four years.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

If no change comes blame the GOP for filibusters or the house for not passing anything.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Obama doesn't want to change much in the first place, son.


----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

Redead said:


> Well Texas basically considers seceding every other week nowadays


We'd wipe the floor with Texas before they had a chance to pick up arms. We've done worse for oil fields, what makes Texas think they're different?


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Huganomics said:


> Obama doesn't want to change much in the first place, son.







Old video,But your post reminded me of it.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The Great Below said:


> We'd wipe the floor with Texas before they had a chance to pick up arms. We've done worse for oil fields, what makes Texas think they're different?


Ah yes, military aggression is the answer to everything.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Brother CP, what are your thoughts on the GOP's awful treatment of Ron Paul being what ended up costing the election?


----------



## UnsungZer0 (Nov 21, 2009)

Karma101 said:


> I still don't understand this, can someone please explain it to me?
> 
> Congrats to Obama though.


 It's pretty much a quote he used during a debate back in Oct. He's a news article if you'd like to learn more

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ll-of-women-comment-sets-internet-ablaze.html


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)

Karl Rove, Donald Trump, the tweets, and Obama coming out to Stevie Wonder's Signed, Sealed, Delivered, I'm Yours were the highlights of the night.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

If that were true it'd be just.

Enjoy four more years.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> If that were true it'd be just.





GOON The Legend said:


> It seems that the Ron Paul people really DID cost Romney the election.
> 
> In Ohio, Romney lost by 29,897 and in the primaries, Paul received 111,238 votes.
> 
> ...












Brother Ron and friends of LIBERTY have gotten the last laugh it seems.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Eh, maybe. No way to tell where those votes ended up in the presidential election. Certainly didn't go to brother Gary.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Those votes probably went to either A) Obama out of spite, B) Third party, C) Ron Paul via write in, or D) They didn't vote at all. Some of those probably went to Romney, but not a lot. Had Romney and the GOP not treated the Ron Paul delegates like dirt, the backlash against Romney wouldn't have been as bad with Libertarians, as some might have voted for him just to get rid of Obama, although that option was off the table after the convention.

True or not, the GOP Establishment will blame the Libertarians since it was an extremely close election, and Brother Rand might feel the effects.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Ah yes, military aggression is the answer to everything.


im trying to lay off the guy but that was killer lol . i know he was sad you saw it in his eyes.


----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)

I would like to thank all my fellow posters who voted for Barack Obama, the greatest underdog in US political history. I know we did the right thing.


With that said, I'm kind of bummed it wasn't a closer race. I thought for sure Romney was going to win Florida and Nevada. 

- Vic


----------



## Dunk20 (Jul 3, 2012)

I'm from Portugal and I am so happy Obama won. Fnally the world can breathe easy again.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Vic Capri said:


> I would like to thank all my fellow posters who voted for Barack Obama, the greatest underdog in US political history. I know *we did the right thing.*
> 
> 
> With that said, I'm kind of bummed it wasn't a closer race. I thought for sure Romney was going to win Florida and Nevada.
> ...


we did the right thing.


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Dunk20 said:


> I'm from Portugal and I am so happy Obama won. *Finally the world can breathe easy again.*



Must still keep and eye on those Russians. They are up to something....:side:


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

JasonLives said:


> Must still keep and eye on those Russians. They are up to something....:side:


Their President is busy building a lair under a volcano. He'll be occupied for the next little bit.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Anark said:


> This is actually hilarious. It's a shame we can't see her but oh my gosh THE RAGE.


I feel sorry for this lady since she's so fucking dumb.




redeadening said:


> Well Texas basically considers seceding every other week nowadays


lol it's just RICK PERRY being a blowhard. Texas will be a swing state around 2020 give or take a few years.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Can we sell Arizona back to Mexico? Seriously, I bet that transaction would give us enough start-up cash to at least build some nationwide mass transit.


----------



## Real Deal (Dec 8, 2010)

This is going to be a LONG post (sorry about that)...just typed this to someone else on Facebook, then added it to my wall. I know many Republicans won't read this, probably won't get past this sentence, but if you do, you'll understand why this was all typed at the end, and I'll appreciate everyone reading it, regardless of what you believe. Let's talk about the things Obama has done in office:

- Prevented a full-blown depression.
- Stopped massive job losses and created 5+ million jobs.
- Moved the economy into consistent GDP growth.
- Cut taxes for 95% of working families.
- Saved the auto industry, which saved jobs.
- Passed the Affordable Healthcare Act (eight presidents have tried and failed).
- Passed the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Play Act.
- He and the military forces hunted down, and killed, Osama...and decimated Al Qaeda's leadership.
- Ended the war in Iraq.
- On track to end fighting in Afghanistan in 2014 (set year).
- Extended The Patriot Act.
- Repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell.
- S.T.A.R.T. Treaty with Russia.
- Comprehensive sanctions on Iran.
- Doubled the number of border guards on US-Mexico border and increased the number of cameras, drones and planes.
- Wall Street reform.
- Strengthened ethics rules, including banning gifts from lobbyists and ending revolving door practices.
- Expanded the Freedom of Information Act.
- Authorized more nuclear power plants, green and renewable energy initiatives.
- Reformed student loan programs.
- Expanding healthcare coverage to include pre-existing conditions.

Of course, there's more, but these stand out. On a personal note, the pre-existing condition rule being eliminated is going to be what helps me if anything else happens to me later on (and it probably will, won't deny it). I was fortunate to be able to get Medicaid quickly after going completely blind in both of my eyes (due to diabetic retinopathy), and to get my eyes cut on and cleaned out for tens of thousands of dollars each surgery. I agree that people do take advantage of the system, but Romney's ideas would have made it a longer and tougher process for me, when I truly needed to cover those surgeries that allow me to post this to you today, and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.

There are conspiracy theorists everywhere. People think Obama is a terrorist, just like they found reasons to believe Bush purposely crashed planes into buildings on 9/11. What causes the fear isn't the man, but what surrounds him...and today, it's easy to target Obama as some irate Muslim wanting to crush America as it is for me to tell you that Romney's $2 trillion increase for the military, and the isolation of other countries, was to start a nuclear WW3, to create jobs here and overseas, killing innocents across the world just so our own people can see production go up for weapons, clothes, planes, and military vehicles.

If Obama had bad intentions, he would not have risked doing nothing about those "bad intentions" while in his first term. He has had four years of guaranteed presidency to do all of the bad things people assume he plans on doing...and logically, there's no reason why he would wait for a second term to do them. For all he knew, he could have been on the losing end last night.

Last night, it wasn't about parties, or solely about the economy. It was about consistency. The Republicans may have had a better chance with a different candidate, but Romney wobbled left and right in so many discussions...not wanting to set a date for pulling out of Afghan. (but then decided to in the last debate), not supporting abortion AT ALL earlier in the year (but then changing his mind in the debates), shutting down coal plants years ago (but now he's a "coal guy"), wanting to make drastic cuts in education (but saying education is very important), wanting to give tax cuts across the board (but then saying in the debates he was not cutting taxes for the rich), disagreeing on much of Obama's foreign policy (but then agreeing on 75% of everything in the third debate), saying women's pay was important to him (despite turning his head at the Ledbetter Fair Play Act, and ignoring questions about the pay to talk about just getting them more jobs), and MUCH more. Ryan was the same...changed a lot of ideas because of Romney's flip-flopping, including his Medicare stance (which was a huge reason why a lot of Republicans were upset to hear he was chosen as VP that day).

As someone who covers basketball in the wide world of media, I know that controversy sells. If I wanted attention, I write about the Dallas Cowboys' future being bleak, and then I provide as many Dallas-area football fans with the article. It doesn't mean I necessarily believe it, but it sells. A lot of things that are believed about Obama sell, and that is what makes the media manipulative, in turn hurting our belief in hope and a future. It clouds what we should be seeing, and creates fear to help us seek what we don't necessarily want to see...yet, what seems to be the worst-case scenario. It forces us to be dependent on constant change, to be inpatient.

I never ask anyone to believe what I do, religion or politics. I ask everyone to analyze everything on their own, to think rationally. This idea that Obama is out to obliterate our country has been created as a result of the combination of fear and struggle...and that struggle existed before he took office, even before Bush or Clinton. Sometimes, it hits home...with the disabled, middle class, lower class, immigrants who actually desire to become a true citizen, the women who have been raped, the diabetics who are laid off and eventually have to wait months for their new insurance to cover $300+ of Type 1 diabetic supplies every month, the blue-collar man that works through ruptured discs in his back and vertebrae in his neck because the insurance company won't pay for a surgery until he pays for 52 sessions of physical therapy (out-of-pocket) and unnecessarily goes to a psychologist for a year (to "prepare" him for such a surgery)...that is my father...and it's not that we all feel the same way about Obama, or Romney, or even those around us everyday, we just continually search for answers, and occasionally, we reach too far. What makes us, though, is what we reach FOR, and last night, many Americans reached for patience and consistency, not for hate or urgency, no matter who was on the ballot...even for those voting in Romney because of his beliefs are reaching for a legitimate cause. 

Unfortunately, what has truly crippled this country over the last decade has not been Obama's policies, or Bush's war, or a Clinton sex scandal, but the American people's ever-growing pessimism, soaking in negativity for the sake of filling one's interest (and, sometimes, pockets), a two-party system that benefits from the creation of that fear and uncertainty by simply running the opposition into the ground and eliminating any chance of bipartisan productivity we have, transforming our realistic goals into mere hopes and dreams. We are born to make the best of life, to take advantage of such a precious gift, and our country hinges on that. If we don't open our books and turn the pages together, our ability to learn, to grow, and to live together dissolves, and consequently, the true meaning of being free and living the American dream ceases to exit.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Cry moar, LOLbertarian. Nobody wants your regressive policies.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

I don't know whether to laugh or just feel bad when I see fundies saying that the solution for the Obama problem is to, of course, pray to the nonexistent space zombie that they worship. But I mostly laugh.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Oh come now guys. Election is over. K? 

Let us go back to not being assholes to each other.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Asenath said:


> Cry moar, LOLbertarian. Nobody wants your regressive policies.


Oh dear.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Huganomics said:


> I don't know whether to laugh or just feel bad when I see fundies saying that the solution for the Obama problem is to, of course, pray to the nonexistent space zombie that they worship. But I mostly laugh.


Shut up you! You're just jealous we had Jesus _cum_ into our hearts!


----------



## King_Of_This_World (May 17, 2012)

So to sum up, blacks, hispanics and single women who believe they are owed something for nothing, who think that the government should do everything for them and give everything to them, have voted on mass for the man and the party who will carry on giving them free stuff. To hell with the economy, to hell with the debt or the good of the country as a whole, they just want more of their free stuff that they have a* RIGHT* to get from the government.

The reality is that the economy of the country is crumbling. The unemployment situation is worsening. The debt situation is worsening. Everything for the very people who think Obama's gonna help them is getting worse. Incredible. The liberal medias brainwashing power over these weak-minded groups is just staggering.

I've been saying this for years and its becoming very clear that its the truth, demographics will be the end of America. A hispanic and black majority America will simply not function, it will not ever work. Look at every single black and hispanic majority town, city and state in America,* that *is the future of the US. Nobody chooses to live in those places if they can afford not to, you will have no choice in the coming decades. 

Its like watching a modern day Roman empire fall to pieces infront of your very eyes. There was a very clear choice last night, and the usual groups choose the easy option, more free stuff, more mass spending, more welfare, free contraceptives, free abortions, all paid for by you.

Enjoy.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Oh dear.


Oh. It's the sole retort of disgruntled Paulbots. 












King_Of_This_World said:


> I'm so angry we let those bitches and ******** vote.


Put on your big boy pants. You'll be fine.


----------



## MethHardy (Jul 6, 2012)

Asenath said:


> Oh. It's the sole retort of disgruntled Paulbots.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yep that's all they got.


----------



## Hawkeye81 (Jan 3, 2012)

King_Of_This_World said:


> So to sum up, blacks, hispanics and single women who believe they are owed something for nothing, who think that the government should do everything for them and give everything to them, have voted on mass for the man and the party who will carry on giving them free stuff. To hell with the economy, to hell with the debt or the good of the country as a whole, they just want more of their free stuff that they have a* RIGHT* to get from the government.
> 
> The reality is that the economy of the country is crumbling. The unemployment situation is worsening. The debt situation is worsening. Everything for the very people who think Obama's gonna help them is getting worse. Incredible. The liberal medias brainwashing power over these weak-minded groups is just staggering.
> 
> ...


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Gary Johnson or any other multi party candidate only needed 5% of the votes in order for them to be federally funded in future elections


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

I mean, I'd much prefer an actual liberal in office. President Obama is a middle-of-the-road moderate on a good day, but he's made a great start on economic recovery and civil rights. And I trust him not to wreck the Supreme Court with some goon who wants to bring back the blue laws or make reproductive freedom scarce.


----------



## Callisto (Aug 9, 2009)

TripleG said:


> Oh come now guys. Election is over. K?
> 
> Let us go back to not being assholes to each other.


You mean never?


----------



## Amber B (Dec 9, 2007)

Clutch yo pearls, white people. Blacks, Hispanics and single women (who are all apparently poor as fuck and live in slums) will fuck up America. 

:bosh What in the actual fuck? If that isn't fear mongering than I don't know what is.

Yesterday, watching both campaign party locations and who attended should have been a clear indication or eye opener for some. In Chicago, you had every race/ethnicity, age and gender represented. You know....the way America actually is. In Boston? Not so much. The Republican party is still stuck in an America from 30 years ago which alienates so many different groups of people and demographics. There's a difference between being conservative and being ignorant. It also doesn't help that middle aged men want to control what happens to vaginas.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

King_Of_This_World said:


> I've been saying this for years and its becoming very clear that its the truth, demographics will be the end of America. A hispanic and black majority America will simply not function, it will not ever work. Look at every single black and hispanic majority town, city and state in America,* that *is the future of the US. Nobody chooses to live in those places if they can afford not to, you will have no choice in the coming decades.
> 
> Its like watching a modern day Roman empire fall to pieces infront of your very eyes. There was a very clear choice last night, and the usual groups choose the easy option, more free stuff, more mass spending, more welfare, free contraceptives, free abortions, all paid for by you.
> 
> Enjoy.


Yeah that's pretty racist.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

KoTW is blowing a gasket. LMAO.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

Once our government realizes that taxes should be based on the ability to actually be paid according to consumption then I will take these goons seriously. People who live in larger homes, and consume more should pay higher tax rates. Grow some balls, and tax the wealthy. I'm tired of picking up the burden of the taxes. The Wealthy tax the shit out of you, and I with their "fees", or rates that just casually go up. They even overcharge our government on utilities repair, and utilities in general. The company Entergy was found to have overcharged the tax payers of East Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas. 

A company named TriStem was behind the research. They found that taxpayers are being charged for expenses that don't exist like utilities lines that aren't built, or serious overcharges on utility meters. It's the reason companies like Entergy have received a Federal Tax rate of minus 2.4 percent. The proof is in the pudding, the rich are robbing us blind, and doing it legally all thanks to our brilliant Government you all keep voting in based on your ridiculous religious, and social beliefs. We need to start worrying about how much we are paying in taxes to those who don't need the money due to their already substantial wealth.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

Headliner said:


> Yeah that's pretty racist.


Majority of the individuals that are major shareholders, CEO's, affluent entrepreneurs, members of our United States Government, Board Directors of major fortune 500 companies, and so on are typically white people. Meaning these people are fucking shit up. How can poor people be the source of an economic meltdown? If anything it's welfare to the wealthy that is harming America. This has nothing to do with color because I am white myself, but one could argue that insanely rich Caucasians are destroying the economies of the world. Lmao, racists are so delusional.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You DO realize that the rich pay about 60% of income tax, right? You're acting like they pay nothing.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

truk83 said:


> Once our government realizes that *taxes should be based on the ability to actually be paid* according to consumption then I will take these goons seriously. P*eople who live in larger homes, and consume more should pay higher tax rates*. Grow some balls, and *tax the wealthy*. I'm tired of picking up the burden of the taxes. The Wealthy tax the shit out of you, and I with their "fees", or rates that just casually go up. They even overcharge our government on utilities repair, and utilities in general. The company Entergy was found to have overcharged the tax payers of East Texas, Louisiana, and Arkansas.
> ...


this


----------



## dxbender (Jul 22, 2007)




----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)

The luck of Barack Obama:

He beat Hilary.

He became President.

He stayed President.

*BEST IN THE WORLD!*




Re: "Racism"

Even Fox News says the Latino vote (the very people Romney is related to yet blasted) cost him dearly. This is a matter of undeniable fact.

- Vic


----------



## WWCturbo (Jun 21, 2012)

truk83 said:


> Majority of the individuals that are major shareholders, CEO's, affluent entrepreneurs, members of our United States Government, Board Directors of major fortune 500 companies, and so on are typically white people. Meaning these people are fucking shit up. How can poor people be the source of an economic meltdown? If anything it's welfare to the wealthy that is harming America. This has nothing to do with color because I am white myself, but one could argue that insanely rich Caucasians are destroying the economies of the world. Lmao, racists are so delusional.


Rich peeps aren't innocent but poor people who don't wanna work are even worse. Rich people pay taxes, poor people who choose drinking some cheap liquor instead of working are a lot worse. They won't cover your pension.


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)




----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

it's a good look for mitt imo.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

WWCturbo said:


> Rich peeps aren't innocent but poor people who don't wanna work are even worse. Rich people pay taxes, poor people who choose drinking some cheap liquor instead of working are a lot worse. They won't cover your pension.


Poor people who choose drinking some cheap liquor. . .

Go sit down, read _Nickled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America_ by Barbara Ehrenreich and come back and tell me that upward mobility is as easy as showing up to your job every day. Hell, I work 60 hours a week and am a college educated person, and I _still_ barely break even - that's with no kids, no spouse.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

So last night Fox News said that the country has become "More Brown" and Chris Matthews on MSNBC said he was "Glad" that Hurricane Sandy happened because it helped the Obama campaign. 

So go ahead news media. Give me more reasons to hate you and prefer BBC.


----------



## WWCturbo (Jun 21, 2012)

Asenath said:


> Poor people who choose drinking some cheap liquor. . .
> 
> Go sit down, read _Nickled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America_ by Barbara Ehrenreich and come back and tell me that upward mobility is as easy as showing up to your job every day. Hell, I work 60 hours a week and am a college educated person, and I _still_ barely break even - that's with no kids, no spouse.



I was talking about people who choose not to work because they are lazy. There's plenty of people all around the world who choose to be supported by the government instead of actually trying to accomplish something and work. 

I'm not blaming poor people overall, I'm poor, I still try, I don't sit in my room all day drinking and talking to myself in the mirror. I study and I work and I'm always looking for an extra job on weekends.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

http://www.bennylingbling.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/WalkingDead101-2012-09-10-15-48-37-90.jpg


----------



## virus21 (Sep 22, 2009)

TripleG said:


> So go ahead news media. Give me more reasons to hate you and prefer BBC.


At this point BBC is probably better than the majority of American networks


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

virus21 said:


> At this point BBC is probably better than the majority of American networks


Oh no question. I'd say BBC is better than all of them actually.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

TripleG said:


> So last night Fox News said that the country has become "More Brown" and Chris Matthews on MSNBC said he was "Glad" that Hurricane Sandy happened because it helped the Obama campaign.
> 
> So go ahead news media. Give me more reasons to hate you and prefer BBC.


ya your right that is fuck up but i am a cnn guy . i was in the uk for 5 year of my life too me bbc was so anti usa for me it was a bit much.ii will say it was the last 5 bush years so that may play in to that.

but fox news and msnbc are the worst!!


----------



## LokiBGN (Nov 8, 2012)

TripleG said:


> So last night Fox News said that the country has become "More Brown" and Chris Matthews on MSNBC said he was "Glad" that Hurricane Sandy happened because it helped the Obama campaign.
> 
> So go ahead news media. Give me more reasons to hate you and prefer BBC.


BBC is not great, but it's far better than Fox, MSNBC or CNN. My problem with CNN is that I have noticed they insist on promoting themselves as the "neutral" network, but often times take sides so it just makes them look bad in my opinion.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

LokiBGN said:


> BBC is not great, but it's far better than Fox, MSNBC or CNN. My problem with CNN is that I have noticed they insist on promoting themselves as the "neutral" network, but often times take sides so it just makes them look bad in my opinion.


But the electorate is actually becoming more brown. Mathews said he was glad over a dozen people died? Get real...


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Oh and I guess it's time to edit my sig. Obama won, and I was wrong about my prediction and I'm big enough to admit it. The polls were right.

Congratulations to Barack Obama on winning re-election.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

LokiBGN said:


> BBC is not great, but it's far better than Fox, MSNBC or CNN. My problem with CNN is that I have noticed they insist on promoting themselves as the "neutral" network, but often times take sides so it just makes them look bad in my opinion.


The thing with CNN is that you can never tell which side they're going to take. Some of the commenators do a good job of neutrality - Christiane Amanpour, for example. And some of the usual suspects tilt a shade left, but not as tilted as MSNBC - like Anderson Cooper.

And then, out of nowhere, they'll have some alarmist right-wing nonsense about the budget or birtherism or some weird dogwhistle issue that gets Republicans all freaked out and normal people don't understand what the problem is. It's a bit like an RKO, in that they're totally unwanted and sort of expected in with all the other chaos.

As for the BBC - being critical of the US doesn't mean the station is anti-US. There's a lot to criticise in the States, even in the best of times.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Punked Up said:


> Oh and I guess it's time to edit my sig. Obama won, and I was wrong about my prediction and I'm big enough to admit it. The polls were right.
> 
> Congratulations to Barack Obama on winning re-election.



thats what we need more of bro now lets move on too talking out fiscal cliff as it looms.


House Speaker John Boehner hinted at the possibility of a compromise if the president agreed to tax reform.

Mr Boehner, who negotiated with Mr Obama over a so-called "grand bargain" of spending cuts and new revenues in 2011, said he would accept new revenue-raising as part of a tax reform deal.

Time is tight: Bush-era tax cuts are due to expire at the end of 2012, and automatic, mandatory across-the-board cuts to military and domestic spending are also in the pipeline unless a deal can be reached.

Economists say the overall effect of falling off the "fiscal cliff" could tip the US into recession


can we now just re name this Thread *"U.S. POLITICS"*


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

I just noticed your sig Punked Up,Romney and Ryan were change "negative change"


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

can we now just re name this Thread "U.S. POLITICS"


"*Linda McMahon's False Flag attempt/loses election* " and " *Election Day Votes By Race*" Threads can fit in this "U.S. POLITICS" Thread.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Redead said:


> You're not even a yank?
> 
> Then why are you so happy Obama won? Its a decision with marginal at best effect on you.
> 
> If anything you should be considered about the witch who stole the prime minister seat


You sound upset that Obama won, lol. I have the right to celebrate Obama winning, go away.

She was voted in by her own party to get the leadership. Please have more of an open mind and Rudd had lost a ton of support from the Union, he had like a 30% approval rating. Rudd was great at the start but he started to lack communication with Labor members. If Gillard didn't get voted in..the conservatives would be running the country by now...fuck that.

You mad.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

9QA said:


> thats what we need more of bro now lets move on too talking out fiscal cliff as it looms.
> 
> 
> House Speaker John Boehner hinted at the possibility of a compromise if the president agreed to tax reform.
> ...


The US will have a resession next year because too many investors are scared to invest capital in the economy right now. Just look at the markets today.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://antiwar.com/blog/2012/11/07/obama-bombs-yemen-hours-after-winning-reelection/


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

PunkSE316 said:


> You sound upset that Obama won, lol. I have the right to celebrate Obama winning, go away.
> 
> She was voted in by her own party to get the leadership. Please have more of an open mind and Rudd had lost a ton of support from the Union, he had like a 30% approval rating. Rudd was great at the start but he started to lack communication with Labor members. If Gillard didn't get voted in..the conservatives would be running the country by now...fuck that.
> 
> You mad.


You have the right to celebrate sure, i guess. I mean maybe if you contributed. Its such a bizarre thing to celebrate, a political victory in a foreign country that has almost zero effect on you? That doesnt strike me as a normal reason or thing to celebrate.

As for Australia's politics, i knw nothing about that. Im just going by what Rush and Snrub and the other Aussies said

As for me being mad? At no point did in that post did i remotely even show any emotion more than moderate confusion and apathy


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

can we now just re name this Thread "U.S. POLITICS"


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Well, I'll congratulate the Pres on another term. I'm big enough to do that. 

However, it's time to shit or get off the pot with the fiscal cliff looming. There's no more kicking the can down the road, no more putting it off. Not to mention it's time to deal with Iran before they get a nuke. Obama is getting what most people don't...a second chance. Now he has a chance to cement or tarnish his legacy.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

yeah that iranian nuke that they havent even began building yet sure is a threat to all that world peace america and israel have worked so hard to spread over the last 40 years

just look at all those countries iran has invaded in that time


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Iran isn't a threat.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> *She was voted in by her own party to get the leadership.* Please have more of an open mind and Rudd had lost a ton of support from the Union, he had like a 30% approval rating. Rudd was great at the start but he started to lack communication with Labor members. If Gillard didn't get voted in..the conservatives would be running the country by now...fuck that.


Exactly, she wasn't voted in by the people and she's a hopeless, useless twat. I don't even like Abbott, but even he would be better than Gillard. Rudd was beyond hopeless as well, spent more time sucking off foreign ministers than doing anything in Australia.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## Kiz (Dec 2, 2006)

PunkSE316 said:


> You sound upset that Obama won, lol. I have the right to celebrate Obama winning, go away.
> 
> She was voted in by her own party to get the leadership. Please have more of an open mind and Rudd had lost a ton of support from the Union, he had like a 30% approval rating. Rudd was great at the start but he started to lack communication with Labor members. If Gillard didn't get voted in..the conservatives would be running the country by now...fuck that.
> 
> You mad.


there will be no carbon tax under the government i lead
introduced a tax that makes no money
the pink batts disaster with houses catching on fire
craig thomson using union funds for prostitutes
peter slipper being a disgusting human being yet gillard throwing her support behind a misogynistic disgrace of a human being while incorrectly labelling tony abbott as one.
the flood tax
doing a filthy deal with the greens to ensure they actually got government
we will definitely have a budget surplus. well actually...
the moronic mining tax
the malaysia immigration mess, along with piss poor border security
being in the biggest debt the country has ever seen, mere years after being left with a budget surplus by the howard government
the school halls being built that were too small or just useless
the nbn
reports of her stealing from awu
plus many others in the space of TWO years. 

the woman is a joke and a disgrace of a leader. i'm no tony abbott fan but the liberal government has proven time and time again that they know what they're going. the howard government was one of the best times this country had, and people kicked them out. top job. now you have soaring debt, taxes as far as the eye can see, electricity/water/gas prices rising quarter by quarter, and still a year of lies and wrongdoings to come. i hope you're happy, because im certainly not. and neither as so many others.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Rush said:


> Exactly, she wasn't voted in by the people and she's a hopeless, useless twat. *I don't even like Abbott, but even he would be better than Gillard.* Rudd was beyond hopeless as well, spent more time sucking off foreign ministers than doing anything in Australia.


But he's such a misogynistic pig! Burn the witch!

Now enjoy


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

The right wing love in my country portrayed by the Media in my country, for people from the US, Canada, Europe etc. Wherever you are..News Ltd in Australia has a massive stronghold over here with it's publications such as the Courier Mail and the Daily Telegraph which heavily favour the right wing, granted..there are some left wing writes but come on now, Fox News also has some left wing TV hosts... the media (News Ltd) has really fucked up a lot of things over here. At least the USA has the balls to stand up against Fox News and sniff out bullshit from the likes of Rupert Murdoch. 

I love Australia but it has always been very right wing dominated, and Australians usually tend to vote Conservative. I live in Queensland and the Campbell Newman guy won by a landslide and threw Labor out...but now everyone is complaining about Newman because he has sacked a ton of workers, spent tax money on building a 15,000.00 Queen Elizabeth II sign ffs. Politics over here in Australia is a joke tbh..it's like a game of musical chairs at times.

It was a hung parliament...even if Abbott would have won, he would have to agree to a Carbon Tax due to the Greens having more control in Parliament, it's pretty cut and dry.

Howard is a liar, lol. You know what..you can have those right wing views, I don't care. Everyone will just came back to the Labor party and look for changes again, then back and forth. I don't know what my country wants.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Obama won because of the auto bailout That's why he won in Ohio , Iowa and Michigan . Its that simple.

It was a hard call at the time but time has shows us it was the right call. Leadership is what you do in the worst of times, and the worst of times is what he was walking in to and he made the right calls.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> It was a hung parliament...even if Abbott would have won, he would have to agree to a Carbon Tax due to the Greens having more control in Parliament, it's pretty cut and dry.


Ah no they wouldn't. They would try and implement their own policies on carbon emissions. Its not like they would have been forced to implement a carbon tax. Public pressure may have dictated something but it wouldn't be the same as what Gillard and the Greens are implementing. 

One of Gillard's promises prior to the 2010 election was there would be no carbon tax. 






shock horror, a polition isn't truthful. 

Gillard has done absolutely nothing in the way of meaningful policy on anything. People smuggling under the Howard government was virtually non-existant by the time he lost the election. Now, illegal immigration has taken a massive rise. 










Their solutions for it are utterly woeful and our offshore processing facilities are ridiculously full, and poorly maintained. As snrub said, add to the fact she called Abbott misogynistic while supporting ministers which were done for using public money for prostitutes and sexual harrassment charges.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


>


Nah man they hate us because of our FREEDOMS.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Rush said:


> Ah no they wouldn't. They would try and implement their own policies on carbon emissions. Its not like they would have been forced to implement a carbon tax. Public pressure may have dictated something but it wouldn't be the same as what Gillard and the Greens are implementing.
> 
> One of Gillard's promises prior to the 2010 election was there would be no carbon tax.
> 
> ...


Abbott was standing in front of a sign that said "Julia is Bob Brown's bitch" and he didn't do anything about..he just stood there with a smug smile. The carbon tax isn't bad at all..the media have got people overreacting about it. Australian people, well a lot..tend to flip flop so look I know where I stand on certain topics, and that is all that matters to me.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

i think the tax is the right call we need this type tax in the usa


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> Abbott was standing in front of a sign that said "Julia is Bob Brown's bitch" and he didn't do anything about..he just stood there with a smug smile. The carbon tax isn't bad at all..the media have got people overreacting about it. Australian people, well a lot..tend to flip flop so look I know where I stand on certain topics, and that is all that matters to me.


My issue isn't with the carbon tax. Climate change necessitates something to be done, i just find it pathetic that she came out before the election and said there would be no carbon tax. Then not long after, completely backflips and starts implementing climate change. I know that pretty much every politian lies, i just find it a fairly amusing case of it.

Misogeny is a term that gets bandied about when its not warranted. For examples sake, say it was Rudd who backflipped on carbon change and that person was holding a sign saying 'Kevin is Bob Brown's bitch' then he would get vilified for hating gays. Its nothing more than the usual putdowns each party uses, the fact that Gillard is a woman suddenly makes Abbott misogynistic? Misogyny is characterised by a hatrid of women. This can be expressed in different ways but nothing Abbott has done is a manifestation of misogyny but rather an expression of how politics works nowadays.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

That would never happen to a male politician dude..

It's clear that there is just a raw ugly hate for Gillard from the Conservatives. If you can't see that than..I don't know what to say but like I said before, I know my views and I'm sticking by them. I don't even mostly bother talking Australian politics...it's all over the place. I'll always stick by Labor though, 100 percent. People in Queensland are already complaining about Newman when the majority of them voted him in..like I said before, I don't know what this country wants..it's up for them to decide.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

PunkSE316 said:


> That would never happen to a male politician dude..
> 
> It's clear that there is just a raw ugly hate for Gillard from the Conservatives. If you can't see that than..I don't know what to say but like I said before, I know my views and I'm sticking by them. I don't even mostly bother talking Australian politics...it's all over the place. I'll always stick by Labor though, 100 percent. People in Queensland are already complaining about Newman when the majority of them voted him in..like I said before, I don't know what this country wants..it's up for them to decide.


your right but all you can do is vote.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

Yeah there is a hate for Gillard. There was also a hate for Rudd, Beazley, Latham and a few of the other blokes they had. Like you say, media has a massive influenece over things though and thats the angle they play up ie 'Gillard only gets hate for being a woman'. The fact that you argue that point about the media on some issues, yet cannot see it in others is slightly naive. Personally I dislike her policies, the fact that she's a woman is irrelevant. 

If you look into it, Latham was constantly criticised for having a huge temper, Rudd for his image, Beazley for being a moron, honestly can't remember the other bloke i'm forgetting Labor had as leader for a little bit so i can't comment on him. 

On the flip side, Abbott cops a ton of stick for his views on religion and in the media is portrayed as a woman hating, homophobic man, Howard portrayed as a pathetic old man, Turnbull copped flack after one of his ministers faked an email to implicate rudd and Swan in a car scam, and that other bloke the Libs had wasn't around for long either.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

9QA said:


> your right but all you can do is vote.


Yeah man.

Campbell is a conservative btw...my state Queensland has always been heavily right wing though but yeah, Labor(Left wing) got chucked out but now they are complaining just as much about the Conservatives who they brought in by a landslide. Australia is all over the place..I know my stance and yeah.

To clear things up for everyone.

Australian Labor Party = Left Wing
Australian Liberal National Party = Right wing

The word "Liberal" being associated with right wing..I know, weird, right?


----------



## Kiz (Dec 2, 2006)

simon crean's the other leader after beazley and before foul mouth mark.

brendan nelson for liberal. he was a joke. turnbull is too weak, abbott is too outspoken. i'm a liberal man, but god both parties are a mess. i vote for th policies though, not the mouthpiece. i'd like scott morrison to be given a go though


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Rush said:


> Yeah there is a hate for Gillard. There was also a hate for Rudd, Beazley, Latham and a few of the other blokes they had. Like you say, media has a massive influenece over things though and thats the angle they play up ie 'Gillard only gets hate for being a woman'. The fact that you argue that point about the media on some issues, yet cannot see it in others is slightly naive. Personally I dislike her policies, the fact that she's a woman is irrelevant.
> 
> If you look into it, Latham was constantly criticised for having a huge temper, Rudd for his image, Beazley for being a moron, honestly can't remember the other bloke i'm forgetting Labor had as leader for a little bit so i can't comment on him.
> 
> On the flip side, Abbott cops a ton of stick for his views on religion and in the media is portrayed as a woman hating, homophobic man, Howard portrayed as a pathetic old man, Turnbull copped flack after one of his ministers faked an email to implicate rudd and Swan in a car scam, and that other bloke the Libs had wasn't around for long either.


News Ltd go easy on the Conservatives, lol. The Labor party get it really really bad. Murdoch has a massive strong hold and influence.

I know where I stand and that is that.


----------



## WWCturbo (Jun 21, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Nah man they hate us because of our FREEDOMS.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

After Romney's loss, Republicans need a rethink 

changing the party's position on immigration will improve their fortunes with Latinos. 

40% of the Hispanic vote won by George ]Bush, a supporter of amnesty for illegal immigrants, in 2004. Bush's share of the Hispanic vote is sometimes exaggerated – it was probably not much more than Ronald Reagan's was in 1984 – but it was certainly better than what Romney or John McCain managed.

in 2016 i will be thinking about New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. 

i think Marco Rubio can help get the Hispanic vote but as i said my eye is on New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. As for Jeb Bush ....hellll no!!!!! no way in hell do i think ever letting a bush ever get back in the white house is good.


Christie, a first-term governor, was one of the top names tossed around early in the 2012 cycle but he never warmed to the idea of running, saying he was focused on serving New Jersey. he's a Northeast Republican from a blue state, but his fiery temperament is the polar opposite of Romney's.

Christie recently was put in the politically awkward position of praising the opposing party's president when Obama helped New Jersey with disaster relief after Hurricane Sandy. Christie lashed back at critics for suggesting he should put politics above helping his state's storm victims, and he denied Wednesday that he had given Obama an "embrace" over the storm.

Even Obama remarked that he’s a “good man” and a “family man,” though the president disagrees with his “vision of America.”

Democrats, however, have cast him as extreme on a range of issues, most notably Medicare, which his budget plan would eventually convert to a voucher-based system for future beneficiaries. Ryan has countered that Democrats have offered no credible plan for reforming -- and saving -- the entitlement program for seniors.

The outcome of the struggle between the party's establishment and its more conservative Tea Party wing could be critical in deciding what kind of candidate gets the nomination in four years, and there has been talk about the need to broaden the base, given the country's growing Hispanic population and national shifts on social issues, such as gay marriage.

A successful 2012 Republican candidate will need to appeal to Latinos to a greater extent than Romney did in 2012

i dont know what is next for the Republican but i know id love to vote Republican but with the Tea Party wing i just can do it i hope we get a Republican that will shifts on social issues and tax issues . i am not a one issue so if the Republicans can just shift on some issues maybe they can get my vote.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> News Ltd go easy on the Conservatives, lol. The Labor party get it really really bad. Murdoch has a massive strong hold and influence.
> 
> I know where I stand and that is that.


you are aware that News Limited don't make all the newspapers, nor do they have all the media networks? :kobe3



Mr. Snrub said:


> simon crean's the other leader after beazley and before foul mouth mark.
> 
> brendan nelson for liberal. he was a joke. turnbull is too weak, abbott is too outspoken. i'm a liberal man, but god both parties are a mess. i vote for th policies though, not the mouthpiece. i'd like scott morrison to be given a go though


I loved Latham, the threat of him finally snapping and punching out someone made things far more interesting.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

9QA said:


> After Romney's loss, Republicans need a rethink but not reinvention
> 
> Many Republicans hope that simply changing the party's position on immigration will improve their fortunes with Latinos. Their evidence is the 40% of the Hispanic vote won by George W Bush, a supporter of amnesty for illegal immigrants, in 2004. Bush's share of the Hispanic vote is sometimes exaggerated – it was probably not much more than Ronald Reagan's was in 1984 – but it was certainly better than what Romney or John McCain managed.
> 
> ...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/07/after-romney-loss-republicans-need-rethink

i didnt know you wrote for the guardian!


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Redead said:


> http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/07/after-romney-loss-republicans-need-rethink
> 
> i didnt know you wrote for the guardian!


i did pic parts from it but did not cope it as i did not think the same re look at it


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Rush said:


> you are aware that News Limited don't make all the newspapers, nor do they have all the media networks? :kobe3
> 
> Um, of course. In Queensland though, News Ltd have a massive influence. People treat it as gospel type word up here. Hence why Newman won by a landslide but now people don't even want him in office anymore...it just doesn't add up to me and probably many others. They just believed all the good stuff spouted out about Newman in the Courier Mail, and now they're just massively confused..that is why I don't even bother talking about any form of Australian politics..no one knows what they want. I stand by what I believe in and thats all I have to say.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> Um, of course. In Queensland though, News Ltd have a massive influence. People treat it as gospel type word up here. Hence why Newman won by a landslide but now people don't even want him in office anymore...it just doesn't add up to me and probably many others. They just believed all the good stuff spouted out about Newman in the Courier Mail, and now they're just massively confused..that is why I don't even bother talking about any form of Australian politics..no one knows what they want. I stand by what I believe in and thats all I have to say.


In Sydney they own the Telegraph, and they also own the Australian both of which i rarely read. Pretty much the only thing i use the Telegraph for is to read the sports and play supercoach. Sydney Morning Herald is a far better paper. 

also....



PunkSE316 said:


> I know where I stand and that is that.





PunkSE316 said:


> Australia is all over the place..I know my stance and yeah.





PunkSE316 said:


> like I said before, I know my views and I'm sticking by them.





PunkSE316 said:


> I know where I stand on certain topics, and that is all that matters to me.





PunkSE316 said:


> I stand by what I believe in and thats all I have to say.


We get the fucking message. You know where you stand on certain topics. Don't need to mention it every fucking post, i'm not trying to change your stance on anything, i'm not trying to get you to swing to the right, you don;t have to repeat it over and over.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

So, Australians. Are your leaders bombing innocent people in the middle east every other day without criticism from the media as well?


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)




----------



## Kiz (Dec 2, 2006)

nah, our government would find a way to screw it up regardless.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

more than the american one?


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Ann Coulter is a pretty horrible person.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

No one cares about Ann Coulter. She's a troll. And possibly a man.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Rush said:


> In Sydney they own the Telegraph, and they also own the Australian both of which i rarely read. Pretty much the only thing i use the Telegraph for is to read the sports and play supercoach. Sydney Morning Herald is a far better paper.
> 
> also....
> 
> ...


The Telegraph would have a ton more influence though...

I'm allowed to say that statement over and over again if I want..it's not harming anyone at all. 

Point is, the Australian public at times take the media for their word from a company that hacked phones in the UK. It's not good.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> No one cares about Ann Coulter. She's a troll. And possibly a man.


Agreed.


----------



## Rush (May 1, 2007)

PunkSE316 said:


> The Telegraph would have a ton more influence though...
> 
> I'm allowed to say that statement over and over again if I want..it's not harming anyone at all.
> 
> Point is, the Australian public at times take the media for their word from a company that hacked phones in the UK. It's not good.


Not really. Telegraph is a fairly garbage paper. It has a slightly higher readership during the week, Herald has a higher viewership on a Saturday (idk why, i suppose because of the inserts and during the week people don't tend to like broadsheets on buses)

The Herald is a far more politically balanced paper, and doesn't overtly favour any particular party. Its endorsed both parties at certain points and opinion columns have been done by members from both political parties.


----------



## TKOK (Apr 6, 2006)

Ann Coulter has a Adam's Apple. No way that's not a trap.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Rush said:


> Not really. Telegraph is a fairly garbage paper. It has a slightly higher readership during the week, Herald has a higher viewership on a Saturday (idk why, i suppose because of the inserts and during the week people don't tend to like broadsheets on buses)
> 
> The Herald is a far more politically balanced paper, and doesn't overtly favour any particular party. Its endorsed both parties at certain points and opinion columns have been done by members from both political parties.


Exactly my point though...News Ltd isn't balanced and a lot of people believe it...it's pretty scary.


----------



## chada75 (Aug 12, 2009)

kobra860 said:


> No one cares about Ann Coulter. She's a troll. And possibly a man.


She's a man,Baby!


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

CamillePunk said:


> So, Australians. Are your leaders bombing innocent people in the middle east every other day without criticism from the media as well?


Its just the middle east. Its not Europe ffs.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> No one cares about Ann Coulter. She's a troll. And possibly a man.


I think The Boondocks covered that,Yeah I bet she's a troll too.She think Obama is America's most liberal president ever,Its like the American president during WW2 never existed to her.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

JasonLives said:


> Its just the middle east. Its not Europe ffs.


whats that supposed to mean?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Redead said:


> whats that supposed to mean?





JasonLives said:


> Bomb the brown people! They aren't even human!


Translated for you, Brother Redead.


----------



## sjones8 (Jan 31, 2011)

Let's put this in perspective. The Republicans should feel betrayed by a conservative media and media pundits that told them what they wanted to hear instead of what was actually happening. 

They have lost two straight Presidencies and by embracing Fox, a network which legitimized the Tea Party at what is now looking like at the expense of the Republican party with candidates tying themselves to their wants, where does this leave those candidates and where does it leave Fox News whose demographic continues to get older? That network convinced their viewers that America was on the Tea Party side and that Barack's win in 2008 was a fluke. 2010 helped them with this theory. 2012 gave them a huge reality check. Once things get done, 2016 is looking grim for the GOP.

And that network deserve it!


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Redead said:


> whats that supposed to mean?


You know damn well what that means :westbrook2


----------



## JasonLives (Aug 20, 2008)

Redead said:


> whats that supposed to mean?


That its a portion of the world the majority doesnt give a shit about. 
Simple reason why US media doesnt cover it. American lives arent being wasted so its not interesting anymore, not even for the public.

The worlds reaction is usually this:

500 people killed in a drone attack in the middle east = Yawn. What else is on tv.
50 people in a terrorist attack in the US/Europe = Holy shit! That is horrible!

I dont LIKE it being bombed since it just leads to a lot of immigration ( Got enough of that! ) but I really dont care for that portion of the world.
A lot of people do care but they are in the minority here. 

The world is a fucked up place. People these days have much more important things to worry about then some people living out in the desert halfway across the world. Better to just deal with it and live a good life.




GOON The Legend said:


> Translated for you, Brother Redead.


Naaa, in that case I would want to bomb half my country by now.


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

sjones8 said:


> Let's put this in perspective. The Republicans should feel betrayed by a conservative media and media pundits that told them what they wanted to hear instead of what was actually happening.
> 
> They have lost two straight Presidencies and by embracing Fox, a network which legitimized the Tea Party at what is now looking like at the expense of the Republican party with candidates tying themselves to their wants, where does this leave those candidates and where does it leave Fox News whose demographic continues to get older? That network convinced their viewers that America was on the Tea Party side and that Barack's win in 2008 was a fluke. 2010 helped them with this theory. 2012 gave them a huge reality check. Once things get done, 2016 is looking grim for the GOP.
> 
> And that network deserve it!


I can't feel any sympathy towards the Tea Party. 

It was pretty funny when O'Riley and Limbaugh were acting all shocked about the massive Hispanic and African American votes, and Bill O'Riley saying that it's not "Traditional America" voting..if that wasn't racist than I don't know what it is...


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

JasonLives said:


> That its a portion of the world the majority doesnt give a shit about.
> Simple reason why US media doesnt cover it. American lives arent being wasted so its not interesting anymore, not even for the public.
> 
> The worlds reaction is usually this:
> ...


Geez man...there are still some poor innocent people in the Middle East who have to put up with Terrorist bullshit every day. The Middle East is a mess but I'll always have massive sympathy for the innocent ones, also the Troops who have to get caught up in messes over there. Show sympathy dude.


----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Redead said:


> whats that supposed to mean?





JasonLives said:


> That its a portion of the world the majority doesnt give a shit about.
> Simple reason why US media doesnt cover it. American lives arent being wasted so its not interesting anymore, not even for the public.
> 
> The worlds reaction is usually this:
> ...


He's trying to tell you what we all know Redead,The majority of the world don't care if people keep dying in the middle east to most people living in Europe or Australia or America any so called "3rd world country" can rot and its people lives are just less important or even not important at all.I know its disgusting how apathetic some westerns are but there's not much you can do but play along and feel good about how good you are about the fact that you care for all humans from every location.When 9/11 happened I was disgusted and felt great shame and when Japan got hit last year I was devastated,Thats just me atleast I know people who don't give a hoot about this kind of stuff and think they're cool because of how apathetic they are.


----------



## Myers (Jan 19, 2004)




----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

So after the fact a lot of people's justification for being elated by Obama's victory seems to be "He's not Mitt Romney!". Isn't that what people (rightly so) criticized Romney supporters for doing, only supporting Romney for not being Obama despite his actual policies not being particularly clear? Also, wasn't Obama primarily celebrated in 2008 for not being Bush or McCain (who the media painted as Bush 2.0, which is hilarious considering Obama's presidency has been a continuation of Bush's policies)? When are we going to select a leader based on his actual stances on the issues that matter instead of everyday Americans getting involved in media-constructed vendettas none of us have any reason to be involved in? 

Honestly, Romney is a democrat's kind of Republican. Supports big government. Created the blueprint for Obamacare and passed it in Mass. as governor. Follows the Keynesian (government spending = economic growth) model of economics which Democrats champion. 

Meanwhile, regarding foreign policy, Obama might as well be a fucking neo-con. Ramped up the drone strikes in several countries (most of which we are not at war with making them ILLEGAL military actions), got us involved in more foreign wars, is eyeing another in Syria, tripled our military presence in Afghanistan, continues his rhetoric about being a global force for good meaning more nation building in the Middle East using money we don't have while our economy at home is in shambles. Then there's the extension of the PATRIOT act he campaigned against and signing the NDAA allowing any American citizen to be detained indefinitely without due process. 

There wasn't a real choice in the 2012 election, and Obama is an awful president. He inherited a bad economy in 2008, and has put out highly questionable numbers suggesting it MIGHT be getting better. Meanwhile he's ramped up our aggressive neo-con foreign policy and has attacked our civil liberties more than any president prior. But then again, he is friends with Jay-Z, and his wife does seem nice.

Rand Paul 2016


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Excellent post, Brother CP. I hope the Democrats and Rand's opponents in the GOP Primaries in 2016 are prepared for a RANDslide.

Also, don't forget the DRONES that will be in our skies soon.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

People want Rand Paul even less than they wanted Ron Paul. The republicans only shot is a moderate with a brain like the now retired Olympia Snow or Jon Huntsman.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You're right. Nobody wants freedom and/or liberty. They're completely fine with being led to the slaughter by the Obama's, Bush's and Clinton's of the world.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

I'm pretty sure my freedoms (my right to choose, my friends' hard-fought rights to marry people of the same gender, my hypothetical children's right to an education) are safe & sound in the hands of Barack Obama.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> You're right. Nobody wants freedom and/or liberty. They're completely fine with being led to the slaughter by the Obama's, Bush's and Clinton's of the world.


You promote freedom and liberty so much but then you start telling people what they should want.

lol


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

P. sure they're safe and sound in the hand's of Rand as well.



Karma101 said:


> You promote freedom and liberty so much but then you start telling people what they should want.
> 
> lol


Not sure where you got that from in my post.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Rubio is already doing some events in Iowa..that's a sign. Dem side isn't hard to predict with Biden, Hilary and O'Malley being most likely. Republicans will most likely take office.

Rubio/Rand Paul or Rubio/Condoleeza Rice 2016!


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Not sure where you got that from in my post.


I am.

So what is good about this Rand Paul guy?


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Asenath said:


> I'm pretty sure my freedoms (my right to choose, my friends' hard-fought rights to marry people of the same gender, my hypothetical children's right to an education) are safe & sound in the hands of Barack Obama.


So you support the murder of unborn, defenseless fetuses? Also, Romney's state was #1 in education in his term as governor...

Gay marriage I agree. Everyone has the right. But, what can I do, you guys won, whether or not it was because of the typical uninformed voter like you I won't know..


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Rubio is awful. Just another war hawk fake Conservative.

The GOP nomination will probably come down to Rubio vs Paul. God save the Republic if the election is Rubio vs Clinton.



Karma101 said:


> I am.
> 
> So what is good about this Rand Paul guy?


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Punked Up said:


> So you support the murder of unborn, defenseless fetuses?


I support a woman's right to bodily integrity. You cannot use a woman's body against her will. 

And making abortion illegal doesn't stop abortions. It means women with money can travel to wherever abortion is legal, but poor women will be forced to seek out back alley abortions in unsafe conditions. The current estimate is that over the course of time until 1973, when Roe v. Wade was passed, between 5,000 and 10,000 women A YEAR died from them. And countless others were unable to carry later pregnancies.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Gosh I don't care about it enough to watch all those.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Punked Up said:


> So you support the murder of unborn, defenseless fetuses?


Think of it this way, if a female was raped and the suspect got her pregnant, she should have to suffer this psychological torture?


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Yeah considering how the last two elections went and with American demographics dramatically changing, the last thing the GOP needs is another Neo-Con stickler like Rubio. You may think the Paul's are bat shit crazy, but at least they offer change. The GOP will not win another election if they continue preaching their dated ideology, the country is just way too diverse.

I will say Camille has a point with Romney and IIRC that's why the repubs were so against him four years ago.. He did a complete 180 as the election drew closer though, he went from a moderate to a complete neo-con.

As for 2016? Once again, I'll say that I hope Tim Kaine ends up running. He's the best liberal candidate imaginable.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

The GOP will have truly learned nothing if they nominate Rubio in 2016. 

It might be smart to have him as the VP pick though.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Asenath said:


> I'm pretty sure my freedoms (my right to choose, my friends' hard-fought rights to marry people of the same gender, my hypothetical children's right to an education) are safe & sound in the hands of Barack Obama.


Meanwhile your constitutional rights disallowing the government to barge into your home without a warrant or detain you without due process are completely unenforced under Barack Obama. 

But yes, let's call the few decent politicians fighting to maintain these liberties from an over-bearing government "crazies". Don't ask why or for specific details, they just are! Because...I read it on the internet/heard it on TV. :argh:


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

Not sure if this has been posted, but dude's got a tremendous heart. He actually cried here:


----------



## Striker (Aug 31, 2011)

Camille and GOON, if there was any chance in hell Rand Paul got elected, do you honestly think anything he hopes to change will happen?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

All depends on who controls the Congress and the Senate at the time.

If anything, I'm p. sure we won't have a war criminal in the White House for the first time this millennium.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Striker said:


> Camille and GOON, if there was any chance in hell Rand Paul got elected, do you honestly think anything he hopes to change will happen?


It won't. No other politicians would agree with his decisions.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Things like auditing the federal reserve and ending the war on drugs would be tricky, but he would absolutely be able to pull out of the civil wars in the mid east and cease the drone strikes. Absolutely capable of adopting a non-interventionist foreign policy and putting an end to the ridiculous nation building. You guys act like a president is powerless. 

Obama authorizes drone strikes himself it's not like his hands are tied regarding the killing of innocents, he initiates it. He thinks it's the right thing to do. I know, he cried in that one video so he's got a tremendous heart, but crying about winning an election doesn't make up for killing innocent people almost every other day. Unless of course you're extremely biased and willfully ignore the bad things he does, or somehow justify them in your mind.


----------



## sjones8 (Jan 31, 2011)

PunkSE316 said:


> I can't feel any sympathy towards the Tea Party.
> 
> It was pretty funny when O'Riley and Limbaugh were acting all shocked about the massive Hispanic and African American votes, and Bill O'Riley saying that it's not "Traditional America" voting..if that wasn't racist than I don't know what it is...


Fox has that republican base right where they want them. For as much shit as we give CNN for playing both sides of the fence and MSNBC for being too far left, Fox does this garbage EVERY TIME and it blows up in their faces. Folks need to remember that Fox's main tagline is that they're "fair and balanced." 

How did that work on Tuesday night?

Who was the first media source to declare Barack Obama the winner of last nights election? What source then took their camera's downstairs to their war room to show you the "hard working" and "credible" sources crunching the numbers? Karl Rove was stumbling and "panicking." You really think Karl Rove, of all people, would get nervous because of county numbers from Ohio. OHIO. Dude was counting and recounting like a 5 year old that lost a dime of their lunch money. All of this was done with smiles. All of this was done to establish transparency. All of this was done to eliminate bias. 

And every media source quoted them as the go to lead when it was announced.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

people dont want fair and balanced

thats why fox's ratings are sky high and CNN is going down the toilet. even MSNBC does better tha CNN


----------



## Ghetto Anthony (Feb 19, 2004)

Is CNN fair and balanced?


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Redead said:


> people dont want fair and balanced
> 
> thats why fox's ratings are sky high and CNN is going down the toilet. even MSNBC does better tha CNN


No one is fair and balanced. Everyone is biased to a certain extent.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

CNN's problem is that it lurches. MSNBC is pretty factually correct, but obviously with a progressive spin. Fox News tilts right and has a truth problem, to say the least. And CNN will go for a while doing straight reporting with OK fact checking, but suddenly will hace a weird lurch towards some scare issue to one side or another.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Ghetto Anthony said:


> Is CNN fair and balanced?


i think they try to be but it is a tv show


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Ghetto Anthony said:


> Is CNN fair and balanced?


its all relative

compared to MSNBC and fox news?

yes, extremely


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

(CNN) - Three days after being re-elected, President Barack Obama will deliver a statement on the economy Friday, two administration officials said Thursday.

The 1:05 p.m. ET statement in the East Room will serve as an opportunity to address some of the big issues that Washington will tackle in the next few months - including staving off the so-called fiscal cliff - and to outline his priorities moving forward.

An official schedule released by the White House Thursday said the statement would address "the action we need to take to keep our economy growing and reduce our deficit."


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Looking forward to more Keynesian bullshit.


----------



## ChangingAmerica (Nov 9, 2012)

Looking forward to Obamas opportunity to address some of the big issues .


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

LOL yeah right.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

ChangingAmerica said:


> Looking forward to Obamas opportunity to address some of the big issues .


Your first post at a wrestling forum is in a political thread with the screen name ChangingAmerica? That's not weird at all.


----------



## TripleG (Dec 8, 2004)

Calling it now. We are going to get Hillary as President in 2016 whether Obama does a good job or not.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Nobody likes Hilary though. She's easily beatable if the GOP puts up on non-GEEK for the first time since George W. Bush in 2000.

By non-GEEK, I mean someone who's electable. McCain had no shot and the only reason Romney had a shot is because Obama was screwing it up for himself, not because people liked Romney.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

Who in the GOP do you think is electable, Brother GOON? I'm curious.

But yeah, I too feel that the Dems could win again in '16 somewhat in spite of Obama.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Out of all the people in the GOP who is electable, it's Rand Paul and that is really it. Rubio is the GOP's chosen one it seems, but he hasn't done squat in the Senate and is basically who the GOP feels is their "Obama." Once they expose him basically doing nothing in the Senate, he'll be finished. Paul Ryan is damaged goods, Jeb Bush's last name is Bush, and Chris Christie won't be given the light of day by the party.

Rand's platform is basically his father's, and I think once his message starts being covered fairly by the media, more people will latch onto it. He is a bit more socially conservative than his father (although we'll see how much of it is true considering his entire Senate run is an attempt to convince the GOP establishment that he's "one of them" so they embrace him), but his foreign policy is GOAT and his economic plan is pretty good as well, which are the only two things that really matter on the federal level anyway. For the record, he is also against atrocities such as the NDAA, Patriot Act, and has spoken out about the sheer amount of foreign aid we give to another nations.

From what I've seen, most conservatives seem to prefer Rand to Ron, which stuns me considering they're basically the same but I guess it just shows that Rand's plan is working. He's a better politician than his father in the


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Rand knows how to play nice with the GOP while voting his convictions. He's a trickster, in a good way. 

He might need a new haircut before he runs for president though. Gotta look presidential and all that. fpalm


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Rand Paul is unelectable because his policies would drive the country into a downward spiral only seen by the likes of the Bushes. 

If the (R) wants to have a shot, they'll get a moderate - like Obama, but right leaning.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Explain how BALANCING THE BUDGET and not getting involved in other's nation's business would drive this country into the ground.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Asenath said:


> Rand Paul is unelectable because his policies would drive the country into a downward spiral only seen by the likes of the Bushes.
> 
> If the (R) wants to have a shot, they'll get a moderate - like Obama, but right leaning.


:lmao Classic anti-libertarian post with zero specifics.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

GEORGE PRESCOTT GAMICA BUSH.

He and Rubio will be the future. Bush v Clinton round 2 in 2016. Really GOP has to change or die. Pretty sure they'll change. All they have to do is kill Grover Norquist and it's game on again. Not literally kill him btw.

David Frum has a book out already called Why Romney Lost. Frum gets it. He's a conservative that is fed up with his party's bullshit. Republicans can do great things, but what they're trying to do nowadays isn't great. Evolve you stubborn sons of bitches.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Explain how BALANCING THE BUDGET and not getting involved in other's nation's business would drive this country into the ground.


Austerity plans don't work. To improve the economy, you need big, expansive 'Great Society' plans. And those involve investing money instead of tightening up the purse strings.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

MrMister said:


> GEORGE PRESCOTT GAMICA BUSH.
> 
> He and Rubio will be the future. Bush v Clinton round 2 in 2016. Really GOP has to change or die. Pretty sure they'll change. All they have to do is kill Grover Norquist and it's game on again. Not literally kill him btw.
> 
> David Frum has a book out already called Why Romney Lost. Frum gets it. He's a conservative that is fed up with his party's bullshit. Republicans can do great things, but what they're trying to do nowadays isn't great. Evolve you stubborn sons of bitches.


Agreed. If the Republicans don't change, America will basically become a one party system which would be god awful considering the party that would be left in power.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Asenath said:


> Austerity plans don't work. To improve the economy, you need big, expansive 'Great Society' plans. And those involve investing money instead of tightening up the purse strings.


Yes such as FDR's New Deal which prolonged the Great Depression and rose unemployment even further. When did we recover? When we had massive spending cuts following WWII. 

Keynesianism has never worked and never will. Read history, please. Spending cuts are a necessity that people are going to have to accept if they actually want to see the economy improve. 

Just imagine all the money we'd save with Rand Paul's non-interventionist foreign policy vs George Bush and Obama's nation-building, civil war-funding, drone strike bombing foreign policies which have the double-sided effect of creating new enemies and new endless wars, which btw, aside from innocent human lives, also cost money.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

I'm quite familiar with history, thank you. I also come from a family that wouldn't have survived the Depression without social programs like the Civil Conservation Corps. The New Deal was a literally a lifesaver for my grandparents and great-grandparents, who came to Arkansas from Oklahoma in a covered wagon in the 20s and were barely scratching out a living as subsistence farmers.

Having said that, I agree that military spending should be the first on the list of places to tighten. Not social programs - which only account for about 3% of federal spending - or education or public television and broadcasting or any of the other hobby horses libertarians grouse about. And since you brought up knowing history - in the most prosperous times in our nation's history, the top tier of wealth holders paid much more in taxes than they currently do. That's what makes prosperity possible.

You and I are not ever going to agree on the proper governance of this country. And that's OK.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

It's pretty debatable if the New Deal worked or not. WWII muddies the waters. There is no question Keynsian policies were widespread after WWII though. Whether it's viable in a long term sense is also debatable. To me, it can't be sustained over a long period of time because money growing on trees is bad news. Short term, it seems to work. I'm not an economist and I'm not pretending to be right here though. Just some dude's opinion on a wrestling forum.


----------



## DBizzle (Mar 14, 2010)

People need to be allowed to cut defense spending - it's like 50% of the budget ..


----------



## Bob the Jobber (Mar 20, 2011)

DBizzle said:


> People need to be allowed to cut defense spending - it's like 50% of the budget ..


_B-b-but, that means you don't support our troopz!1!1!_

Fucking idiots.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Currently reading the comments on sites like Breitbart and TheBlaze. It seems that right now, the "favorites" for the GOP voting base is Marco Rubio, Paul Ryan, ALLEN WEST (even though he lost his seat in Congress after one term), Michelle Bachmann, and SARAH PALIN.

Hopefully they have all have an epiphany by then. If not, I hope they enjoy the One Party System.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Y'all are fucked until you have a hard purge of the teabaggers.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Yup, the GOP is worse off than we all expected.. There legit only hope is if a libertarian wins candidacy because those are the only republican candidates that would at least have a shot with the majority (which are ironically, the minorities). I doubt it though, if Rand is anything like his father than Conservatives would think he's bat shit crazy.

As for Obama, any confirmation on whether he actually droned Yemen hours after his re-election? If so, I'm fucking done with him.. he always seems like he has something to prove, like he's trying to distance himself from being associated with Islam so he bombs the living shit out of the Middle east and Somalia.. Really despicable.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

He drones Yemen, Pakistan, or Somalia every few days anyway. Not like he's gonna STOP because he got re-elected. Only time drones were mentioned was when Romney COMMENDED Obama for ramping up the drone strikes. Red psychopath or blue psychopath was the decision this year.


----------



## God™ (May 26, 2008)

You can go on and on about how fucked the GOP is but the fact still remains that nearly half of the country voted for them in this election. They'll use that to paper the cracks for another four years until hopefully they get wiped out Nixon/McGovern style. Maybe then they will move forward instead of twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom. The worst thing possible would be a GOP win in 2016 in its current incarnation.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

With a few exceptions, there has never been a one sided election, its always down the line.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

The only way the GOP in it's current incarnation even has a shot is if Obama has a really shitty/scandalous next four years or if the Dems field a terrible candidate.

Yup Camille, It's quite sad... I wish we'd have an actual liberal in office, Obama's killing more civilians than Bush.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

#Mark said:


> Yup, the GOP is worse off than we all expected.. There legit only hope is if a libertarian wins candidacy because those are the only republican candidates that would at least have a shot with the majority (which are ironically, the minorities). I doubt it though, if Rand is anything like his father than Conservatives would think he's bat shit crazy.
> 
> As for Obama, any confirmation on whether he actually droned Yemen hours after his re-election? If so, I'm fucking done with him.. he always seems like he has something to prove, like he's trying to distance himself from being associated with Islam so he bombs the living shit out of the Middle east and Somalia.. Really despicable.


Rand would have a better shot than his father if he runs. For one, he's a much better politician than Ron was in the sense that he knows how to work with the GOP, yet keeps his voting record GOAT in the process. His endorsement of Romney wasn't because he supported him; it was because he knew he wouldn't have a shot in 2016 if he didn't and he looked good by endorsing Romney since his father didn't, as it shows the establishment that A) He's different from his father and B) He's willing to work with them.

When you really think about it, he's a brilliant politician. His strategy seems to be working, as FOX seems to like him as well as the people in the comment section on Neo-Con sites, which is funny since he is almost exactly like Ron if you look at his voting record. Only difference is that he's willing to "play the game.", which Ron never did.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

The only problem is, GOP seems to favor the likes of those who are willing to play their game all the way through.


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

i beg the Republican Party to stop being and backing racism .


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

odd since it was the democrats who fought for slavery down in the south while the first republican Abe was the man who ended slavery

but hey, who wants history


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)

Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink ended slavery, true story


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

wrong, roman abramovich did

setting free all those slaves from shit wages


----------



## Green Light (Sep 17, 2011)




----------



## Gandhi (Sep 15, 2012)

Caiden Cowger deleted his elections predictions video on youtube,Lmfao.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://now.msn.com/hard-to-swallow-bloomberg-bans-food-donations-to-homeless-shelters

You know what the saddest part is? The Democrat sheep in very Liberal states like New York will continue to vote for these nuts because they're incapable of independent thought.

EDIT- If they ARE capable of independent thought and they still vote for nuts like this then I don't want to meet those kind of people.

Credit to RAND PAUL for bringing this issue up on his Facebook page.


----------



## Muerte al fascismo (Feb 3, 2008)

Romney's crazies cost him the election. He had to move much further right then he wanted. It's only in the debates that the true Romney started to shine through, hence the comeback. The republican strategists need to move with the times and have a more inclusive set of policies. If they do nothing, it could be fatal, particularly with the changing demographics.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

I'm a Republican. Fiscally conservative, socially moderate I guess. I have to admit, you know there's a problem with your party when someone asks "Did the rape guy win?" and you have to ask "Which one?"




Rubio/Rice is a perfect ticket, GOP needs to distance themselves from all of the crazies in the party.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Punked Up said:


> Rubio/Rice is a perfect ticket, GOP needs to distance themselves from all of the crazies in the party.


But they won't. A lot of their constituents eat up that crazy talk.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Rubio is the exact type of candidate they should distance themselves from


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> http://now.msn.com/hard-to-swallow-bloomberg-bans-food-donations-to-homeless-shelters
> 
> You know what the saddest part is? The Democrat sheep in very Liberal states like New York will continue to vote for these nuts because they're incapable of independent thought.
> 
> ...


Michael Bloomberg is an independent who used to be republican.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Did the GOP's mistreatment of Ron Paul supporters in the primary affect the result of the presidential election after all?










Honestly, even if Ron Paul had been treated fairly and with respect, I still wouldn't have voted for Romney. He's a liberal masquerading as a neo-con. Lose-lose no matter how he'd actually have ran things once in power.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Well I'm sure they had to upset someone by picking a candidate.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Karma101 said:


> Michael Bloomberg is an independent who used to be republican.


He was a Democrat before that, and was only a Republican for six years. He's a Democrat posing as an Independent. Don't get it twisted.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

romney is a liberal?


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Having had the chance to think about this for the last few days...here's the three big reasons why Obama beat Romney...

1. *ROMNEY WAS NOT A TRUE CONSERVATIVE AND WAS NOT AGGRESSIVE ENOUGH*

People can criticize this all they want, but Romney is not a true conservative. He has a lot of moderate views and has moderated his views over the years. The idea, to me, of an election is to have two separate viewpoints and two completely different stances to choose from. Many here saw Obama and Romney really as one in the same. If there's not a lot of difference between the two, no point in voting for the other one. Many conservatives saw that and stayed home. 

During the third debate, Romney seemed to back off. He didn't press on Benghazi and other issues he should have been hammering on. Some say he didn't want to be seen as a bully, but here was the chance to ask the POTUS the hard questions on a major diplomatic disaster and he backed off. 

2. *OBAMA CATERED TO HIS BASE, ROMNEY NOT SO MUCH*

The idea of having to draw moderates to your viewpoint is BS in an election. First order of business is to rally your base and make sure they are involved. Obama never really moved to the center throughout the campaign. Everything he said and did was to fire up the Democratic/liberal/left-wing base that helped him gain victory in 2008. 

Romney did nothing to really fire up the Republican/conservative/right-wing base. To me, an example was the Chick-Fil-A controversy. If he had weighed in and talked about the values of marriage plus the illegality of mayors and city officials forcing businesses out of their constituencies, he might have won more support from those who they thought was one of them. 

3. *OBAMA HAS THAT "IT" FACTOR* 

Obama may not be the best President, but he has that certain "it" that some politicians have. It makes you want to run through a wall just to vote for them. Folks like Kennedy and Reagan had it, people like Gore, McCain, and Romney did not. Sort of a cult of personality, if you will. 

Now, where do the Republicans go from here? They need to find a way to relay their message about smaller government and fiscal responsibility. Plus, they also need to find a way to perhaps stop with the culture war shit. 

They need to show they will be the party that will allow you to do your thing and give you more freedoms, unlike the Dems. Yes, states are voting for legalization of pot, but will it truly be legal if the feds have their way, for example. You have a country that bans all mention of "under God" in public, and right to religious freedoms are under attack. Not to mention our new national health care, which will not be as great as people think it will be once it takes affect and you see all the flaws, plus our taxes going through the roof to pay for it. 

The Republicans don't need to be Democrat-lite, they just need to find a way to repackage their message and make sure that they point out everyone is welcome. If they don't, then it's going to be a rough road for them.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Them basically becoming Libertarians would give them the best chance to win in 2016. The GOP in their current form is all but dead. They might win on the state level and in Congress, but they will never win the Presidency again if they don't change.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

BruiserKC said:


> 3. *OBAMA HAS THAT "IT" FACTOR*
> 
> Obama may not be the best President, but he has that certain "it" that some politicians have. It makes you want to run through a wall just to vote for them. Folks like Kennedy and Reagan had it, people like Gore, McCain, and Romney did not. Sort of a cult of personality, if you will.
> 
> ...


Agree with all of this plus run an anti-war, non-interventionist platform and it'd be perfect. Right now Obama is basically Bush on steroids regarding foreign policy. Time to use that against him instead of pulling a Romney and COMMENDING Obama's drone strikes. fpalm

Republicans want to cut foreign aid to nations that don't like us, something I imagine 80-90% of Americans would agree with when asked. I'm sure most would also agree we have no business nation building and funding civil wars abroad when our own economy is in the toilet. These were angles the GOP didn't utilize against Obama and that's a damn shame in my opinion.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Them basically becoming Libertarians would give them the best chance to win in 2016. The GOP in their current form is all but dead. They might win on the state level and in Congress, but they will never win the Presidency again if they don't change.


To people who are not libertarians, a libertarian candidate will not rate at all. You work under the idea that with enough pestering, you can make any (R) voting person a libertarian. It's just not true. For the Republicans to have any chance, they're going to have to get off the fringe right and come towards the middle, like the Democrats did.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Asenath said:


> To people who are not libertarians, a libertarian candidate will not rate at all. You work under the idea that with enough pestering, you can make any (R) voting person a libertarian. It's just not true. For the Republicans to have any chance, they're going to have to get off the fringe right and come towards the middle, like the Democrats did.


The Democrats made no move towards the middle. They pretty much stood pat and stayed true to their platform. Obama made no move towards the center, he laid everything out there. Romney moved towards the middle and that's why people wondered where he truly stood. 

Most of the Republican platform is not fringe, it's common sense. Fiscal responsibility of our government, smaller government, more personal freedom, rolling up your sleeves and working hard for what you earn...not fringe to me. 

The next generation of Republicans is about to take over, and if they can make a good case for the conservative point of view, they will eventually be back in control. The Romneys, McCains, the Chris Christies...all gone. It may not be fair to say that about Christie, but I think he's done when it comes to a national candidate. People like Rubio, Paul Ryan, Bobby Jindal, Nikki Haley...all are very solid conservatives and can find ways to bring the conservative message across. Especially Rubio, he has that rock star capability and that "it" factor Obama has.

Coming to the middle doesn't work, it muddles the message. Obama's message was simple, he laid out his view of America and people went along. His vision of America was opposite of what the other side was supposed to be. He made his case, and it worked. The conservative message has to be put in that same fashion.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

*GOON'S* Handbook to secure a GOP victory in 2016 (and beyond).

1. Become more socially liberal. This one is p. obvious, but most Republicans believe that the message isn't the issue, but how their message is delivered. Hint: The message IS the issue, you geeks. If people want to smoke pot, let them. If someone wants to marry someone of the same sex, let them. Republicans preach small government, yet want the government to regulate things such as marriage. You can't have it both ways. Giving freedom back to the people to make their own choices on how they run their lives would get a lot of people back to the GOP who have previously left them and/or have left the Democratic Party.

2. Eliminate the Neo-Conservative "War-Hawk" mentality. It's no secret that the overwhelming majority of people hate war and in turn, won't support a war. In spite of this, the Neo-Conservatives who have hijacked the GOP continue to pound the war drums and it seems that they want to go to war with every nation that gives us the stanky eye. When the American people hear this, they will vote for the Democrats since they at least claim they're anti-war, when President Obama has been just as bad as George W. Bush. Running on a platform of peace would go a long way and it would also allow them to call out the Democrats for being frauds on their foreign policy while not coming off as hypocrites in the process.

3. Legalize Free Market Capitalism and end Corporate Welfare. Let businesses make their own choices and promote competition. A Free Market Healthcare system would have been better than Obamacare, but I digress. If a business goes under, let them go under. There is a reason most businesses go under, and that reason is that a better business has opened up that fits consumer needs better than them. 

4. Respect the tenth amendment. A Gallup Poll conducted in September states that 54% of Americans believe that the government has too much power, and that number is sure to go up as this country descends deeper and deeper into oblivion. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution talks about enumerated powers, which are powers that are left up to the federal government. These powers consist of things such as providing for defense, establish a post office, and to borrow money. Nowhere does it state that the federal government has a role in things such as education and marriage. Respect state sovereignty and shrink the amount of power that the federal government has over the states.

5. Respect civil liberties. Some of this relates to point one, such as allowing homosexual s to get married and letting someone smoke a blunt or two (thus giving them LIBERTY and individual sovereignty). However, this extends past that. This would consist of eliminating bills like the PATRIOT ACT, the Indefinite Detention Clause in the NDAA, abolishing the TSA, and not allowing drones in the sky over American airspace. All of these things are extremely unpopular, and vowing to get rid all of them and restore civil liberties is something that most people get behind.

Tl;dr: Run under the slogan of "Peace, Liberty, and Prosperity" and you have a chance to put a dent into the Progressives. If they don't, I hope they enjoy being the WHIG Party 2.0.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

bama Well said, brother GOON. Agreed on all counts.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

wont it alienate their voters though?

a lot of their voters hate gays, hate drugs, want tougher stances in politics, want war to sort out their problems and more of an emphasis on a return to 'good old fashioned family values' and return to a religious america that never even really existed


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

GOON The Legend said:


> *GOON'S* Handbook to secure a GOP victory in 2016 (and beyond).
> 
> 1. Become more socially liberal. This one is p. obvious, but most Republicans believe that the message isn't the issue, but how their message is delivered. Hint: The message IS the issue, you geeks. If people want to smoke pot, let them. If someone wants to marry someone of the same sex, let them. Republicans preach small government, yet want the government to regulate things such as marriage. You can't have it both ways. Giving freedom back to the people to make their own choices on how they run their lives would get a lot of people back to the GOP who have previously left them and/or have left the Democratic Party.
> 
> ...


I agree with most of what you say. 

One thing I would say is that we need a strong military. No, we don't have to declare war on every nation that looks at us funny, but I want to be strong enough that most countries will think twice before messing with us. Like Theodore Roosevelt said, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

yeah america is really in danger of being invaded any day now by those north koreans

WOLVERINES


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Redead said:


> wont it alienate their voters though?
> 
> a lot of their voters hate gays, hate drugs, want tougher stances in politics, want war to sort out their problems and more of an emphasis on a return to 'good old fashioned family values' and return to a religious america that never even really existed


It would alienate the evangelical Christians to an extent, but in turn it would bring in moderate Democrats, Libertarians, Independents, and young people who don't really have a political affiliation yet. The young people are the ones who would be most affected by America's desastrous foreign policy, as they would be the ones drafted it it ever came to that. Because of this, they would vote for the "peace" candidate, which wouldn't be a Democrat despite popular belief. 



BruiserKC said:


> I agree with most of what you say.
> 
> One thing I would say is that we need a strong military. No, we don't have to declare war on every nation that looks at us funny, but I want to be strong enough that most countries will think twice before messing with us. Like Theodore Roosevelt said, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick."


Yeah, that is my thinking basically. Basically, we shouldn't go out picking fights like we seem to be doing right now.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

GOON The Legend said:


> *GOON'S* Handbook to secure a GOP victory in 2016 (and beyond).
> 
> 1. Become more socially liberal. This one is p. obvious, but most Republicans believe that the message isn't the issue, but how their message is delivered. Hint: The message IS the issue, you geeks. If people want to smoke pot, let them. If someone wants to marry someone of the same sex, let them. Republicans preach small government, yet want the government to regulate things such as marriage. You can't have it both ways. Giving freedom back to the people to make their own choices on how they run their lives would get a lot of people back to the GOP who have previously left them and/or have left the Democratic Party.
> 
> ...


All well and good but alot of those unpopular ideas are heavily invested by those who will do anything to keep it from being change/eliminated. It would be promoted as "too radical" and the majority of Americans would agree. Not because they know better, but simply because they are misinformed. I fear that in order to reach this goal you present can only result if a MAJOR catastrophic event takes place that would reset the system.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

the military industrial complex wouldnt be too happy wouldnt be too happy on this scaling back of defence spending


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

Redead said:


> wont it alienate their voters though?


They can fuck off for all we care.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

BruiserKC said:


> The Democrats made no move towards the middle. They pretty much stood pat and stayed true to their platform. Obama made no move towards the center, he laid everything out there. Romney moved towards the middle and that's why people wondered where he truly stood.


That's because Obama is a moderate.. How can he make a move towards the middle when he's already in the middle? As for Romney, I think it was the opposite. Four years ago, Romney was getting shit from conservatives because of being too liberal, Romneycare, etc. During the caucuses for this election cycle, Romney completely changed his tune and preached some real neo-con ideals. 



Asenath said:


> To people who are not libertarians, a libertarian candidate will not rate at all. You work under the idea that with enough pestering, you can make any (R) voting person a libertarian. It's just not true. For the Republicans to have any chance, they're going to have to get off the fringe right and come towards the middle, like the Democrats did.


Agreed. A liberarian candidate has a better shot with liberals than they do with the conservatives. I think it's virtually impossible for a libertarian to win candidacy. 

Goon's list is great, but that would never happen for obvious reasons. The very foundation of the Conservative party is traditionalism, the second they start preaching social liberal ideals they lose majority of their current voting base. Plus, they'll tick off special interest groups, mega-corporations and the military industrial complex.

I can't see them changing any of their ideology by 2016. Instead, I see Rubio running with the GOP relying solely on his charisma and ethnicity.. He'll come close, but he'll lose to Hilary or Tim Kaine (hopefully).


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Dig most of GOON's AGENDA here, but that Iron Triangle is nigh indestructible. Need to go to work on it with the hammer and bell of LIBERTY.

Also...








Redead said:


> wont it alienate their voters though?
> 
> a lot of their voters hate gays, hate drugs, want tougher stances in politics, want war to sort out their problems and more of an emphasis on a return to 'good old fashioned family values' and return to a religious america that never even really existed


Alienate the racists of the South? Maybe, but who are those fuckers going to vote for if the GOP updates for the 21st Century? They can't vote Democrat anymore. Maybe they just won't vote. We win a small victory. Oh shit, I'm suppressing votes now. I've become the monster I once despised. AHHHHHHH


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> He was a Democrat before that, and was only a Republican for six years. He's a Democrat posing as an Independent. Don't get it twisted.


Trying to make things convenient for yourself I see.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

#Mark said:


> A liberarian candidate has a better shot with liberals than they do with the conservatives.


I'd disagree with this, at least in terms of the two party system. The GOP at least preaches things like small government, while the Democrats are all about big government, which is in stark contrast to what Libertarians believe. Plus, the GOP is a dying party and they would be easier to "take over" than the Democrats. Libertarians have won seats in state houses, Congress, and the Senate in the GOP, and I doubt they would have that much success with the Democrats.

Granted the Democrats at least preach things like anti-war and civil liberties, but as soon as you bring up "small government" they'll tune you out.



Karma101 said:


> Trying to make things convenient for yourself I see.


Look it up yourself and his policies and you would see he's nothing close to a Republican.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Look it up yourself and his policies and you would see he's nothing close to a Republican.


So why did he stop giving aid to those hurricane victims like that news article said? Doesn't sound like very liberal behaviour to me.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Michael Bloomburg said:


> Look, I understand the homeless are hungry, but let's make sure that the right amount of SALTS are in that food first. Can't have the homeless people eating food with too much SALTS.


.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

#Mark said:


> That's because Obama is a moderate.. How can he make a move towards the middle when he's already in the middle? As for Romney, I think it was the opposite. Four years ago, Romney was getting shit from conservatives because of being too liberal, Romneycare, etc. During the caucuses for this election cycle, Romney completely changed his tune and preached some real neo-con ideals.


Obama was far from moderate. He has always been a liberal and National Journal magazine had him as the most liberal Senator per his voting record.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

GOON The Legend said:


> .


And by salts, he means BATH SALTS. ***** is creating his own army GOON to battle the GOP, can't you see that?


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

BruiserKC said:


> Obama was far from moderate. He has always been a liberal and National Journal magazine had him as the most liberal Senator per his voting record.


Haha. Oh. You're one of those people who thinks moderate regulation and requiring the top tier of wealth holders to pay their own way is tantamount to Teh Communizum.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> .


Which makes him a great guy, stop hating.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

Asenath said:


> Haha. Oh. You're one of those people who thinks moderate regulation and requiring the top tier of wealth holders to pay their own way is tantamount to Teh Communizum.


Wow, I love how liberals have to play the "conservatives are evil" card. People who do that are ignorant and have nothing to really bring to the table. 

I have no problem with paying my fair share and most of the wealthy don't have a problem with paying what they feel is fair when it comes to taxes. The issue is that Obama and his liberal ilk seem to want to punish success. If I see someone that busted their ass and made it in this country, I want to say, "Good job out of them." I have much respect for guys like Warren Buffett, Donald Trump, etc...but all liberals see is "How much can we take from them and spread among the poor?" My line of thinking is that if you didn't earn it, you're not entitled to it. Taking other people's wealth and giving it to someone that didn't earn it is socialism. 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Having had a chance to think about it, I think I have found a way for conservatives to change the message and have the immigration and religious issues come along with them. 

*SAME-SEX MARRIAGE*

Seeing as how marriage is really a religious issue and the government only issues marriage licenses for tax purposes, you have the government stop issuing marriage licenses altogether. In appreciation for the separation of church and state, you let the churches decide who gets married and who does not. Most of the established churches will automatically deny same-sex marriages, some will allow them. You let the established, legitimate religious faiths to decide the issue on their own. 

*STATE'S RIGHTS*

Issues like drug legitimacy are going to boil down to state's rights anyway. Some issues are that way also. For example, here in Iowa fireworks are illegal, they are legal however in Missouri and South Dakota. Nevada and Rhode Island make prostitution legal, everywhere else is banned. Let the states decide for themselves whether or not to allow marijuana possession and use. 

*IMMIGRATION*

I'll have to make one thing clear...for the majority of people in this nation, amnesty for illegals will NEVER, EVER...EEEEEVERRRR...be acceptable. Put that thought away, it will never happen and will not be allowed. However, there is a path to citizenship that you can make and hold people accountable. Here's how I'd do it. 

I give all illegals in this country a timeframe of 1 year. Within that year, you turn yourself in to the authorities. You end up paying a fine and made to go to the back of the line behind those that are here legally. However, you are then permitted to gain green cards/work visas/whatever, and are then on the road to becoming a legal citizen of the United States. If, after that 1 year, they have chosen not to turn themselves in or don't do what is required of them, they are shut off from health care, schools, etc. They are immediately deported if caught and banned from returning. 

Then, you put fences up on the borders and enforce the immigration laws of this country. For other nations that complain, tell them that this is how it will be, especially Mexico where naturalized citizens there can't even own property or vote. In addition, you make English the official language of the United States. Of course, I would overhaul and reform the INS and make ESL classes readily available. 

*AMERICA FIRST*

What I thought was funny that during the Clinton years, he was readily involved throughout the world with the United States and our interests. People screamed about us being the selfish superpower who can't stay out of other's business. When George W. Bush took over, he originally intended to be involved less and deal with our own interests at home first. Those same people then screamed about us being the selfish superpower that doesn't give a shit about anyone but ourselves. We can't win. 

Therefore, I ask, why even try to win? I appreciate we want to help the hungry and destitute throughout the world, but we have people in this country that are starving and need our help. To be a stronger country, we should be helping them first. Then, we can focus outward. WWJD? In fact, Jesus said, "If you offer to remove a speck from your brother's eye in spite of the log in your own, that makes you a hypocrite. Take care of your own eye first, then help your brother." I am more than happy to put America first, and that's not a bad thing. 

We have many nations whose people want nothing to do with us. I'm fine with that, we cut off all assistance to them, and that includes financial aid. We can put that money to use to help the hungry and desperate here.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

DubC said:


> And by salts, he means BATH SALTS. ***** is creating his own army GOON to battle the GOP, can't you see that?


Thank you for opening my eyes, DUB. I will not let Bloomberg take away my FREEDOM and LIBERTY.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

BruiserKC said:


> *IMMIGRATION*
> 
> I'll have to make one thing clear...for the majority of people in this nation, amnesty for illegals will NEVER, EVER...EEEEEVERRRR...be acceptable. Put that thought away, it will never happen and will not be allowed. However, there is a path to citizenship that you can make and hold people accountable. Here's how I'd do it.
> 
> ...


1 year timeframe? :lmao What a complete joke.


----------



## Sack Lunch (Nov 5, 2012)

The racist shitheads down here where I live sure are mad as they thought Romney was really going to win, and I don't mean those KKK fuckers but college "educated" people who have convinced themselves they aren't bigots.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

DubC said:


> 1 year timeframe? :lmao What a complete joke.


The illegals would be given a window of 1 year to make themselves legal. The one year window is the time of which it would be for them to turn themselves in. I understand the process to citizenship takes longer but the key is to start the process. After that year is up, those that haven't turned themselves in will be cut off from all services, rounded up, and deported permanently. 

I think a year is more than fair...like the free times they give you to turn in a library book or a gun. Come on in and make amends, no questions asked. After that, you are SOL.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Seriously, what's up with all these liberals openly bragging about how whites, and white male votes no longer matter in this country?

I'm thinking this mass immigration was a goddamn liberal/Jewish plot to help them all get elected, along with getting people addicted to government programs.



> "Mitt Romney is the president of white male America.
> 
> Maybe the group can retreat to a man cave in a Whiter House, with mahogany paneling, brown leather Chesterfields, a moose head over the fireplace, an elevator for the presidential limo, and one of those men’s club signs on the phone that reads: “Telephone Tips: ‘Just Left,’ 25 cents; ‘On His Way,’ 50 cents; ‘Not here,’ $1; ‘Who?’ $5.”
> 
> In its delusional death spiral, the white male patriarchy was so hard core, so redolent of country clubs and Cadillacs, it made little effort not to alienate women. The election had the largest gender gap in the history of the Gallup poll, with Obama winning the vote of single women by 36 percentage points."


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/11/opinion/sunday/dowd-romney-is-president.html



> "White people vote for white people like it's going out of style," Maher said during the New Rules segment at the end of his first post-election episode. "And like most things white people do, it's going out of style."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...hite-people-going-out-of-style_n_2109227.html











Here's a breakdown of votes by race, by the way:


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mithro said:


> Seriously, what's up with all these liberals openly bragging about how whites, and white male votes no longer matter in this country?


No one is bragging about that.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> No one is bragging about that.


I hang out on liberal parts of internet just to rage, I've read this bragging constantly.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mithro said:


> I hang out on liberal parts of internet just to rage, I've read this bragging constantly.


The white vote still does matter though because they represent 72% of the electorate. Most of those people bragging don't really know what they're talking about.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

kobra860 said:


> The white vote still does matter though because they represent 72% of the electorate. Most of those people bragging don't really know what they're talking about.


True, but you gotta admit that the large non-white voter turnout swung this election for Obama.


----------



## Muerte al fascismo (Feb 3, 2008)

kobra860 said:


> The white vote still does matter though because they represent 72% of the electorate. Most of those people bragging don't really know what they're talking about.


If you split the white vote, I think the Democrats were attracting the young and the single women.

When you factor in the Latino, AA and other minority groups, It's electoral suicide to neglect all of them.

It's to much of a roadblock to alienate all these voters.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

GOP really is old, white, and history


----------



## PunkSE316 (Jul 22, 2012)

Damn. Romney is taking this loss really hard....


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

how is the GOP history?

they ideas are kinda antiquated sure but remember, half the country voted for them


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Only joking, they're at the same place the Dems were after the 2004 election..

A little change and they'll be back in the thick of things


----------



## 9QA (Aug 22, 2011)

Flush with re-election vigor, President Barack Obama called Friday for House Republicans to immediately pass a bill *already approved by the Senate* that would maintain current tax rates for middle-class Americans while increasing taxes of wealthier citizens.


----------



## ChangingAmerica (Nov 9, 2012)

increasing taxes of wealthier citizens was what Obama was running on and what he was re-election as president of the United States on so do it and do it now House Republicans or we will vote you out in 2 years !!


----------



## Snowman (Apr 7, 2010)

^^^ 9QA could not have made that any more obvious


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Dude created two accounts just to shill Obama. What a weirdo.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Not as weird as a gimmick poster who supported 4 different candidates.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Nah it's definitely weirder to create two accounts and act like you're two different people.


----------



## Striketeam (May 1, 2011)

Enjoy a good thing while it last in regards to Colorado and Washington legalizing weed, the federal government will continue to enforce its harsh anti-marijuana laws and ignore states rights. Obama is fully behind this even though he stated in 2008 that he wouldn't go after people for it and has even admitted that he did it in college. He might as well be republican given how conservative he is, just a wolf in sheeps clothing.


----------



## Bestia 666 (Aug 31, 2012)

Striketeam said:


> Enjoy a good thing while it last in regards to Colorado and Washington legalizing weed, the federal government will continue to enforce its harsh anti-marijuana laws and ignore states rights. Obama is fully behind this even though he stated in 2008 that he wouldn't go after people for it and has even admitted that he did it in college. He might as well be republican given how conservative he is, just a wolf in sheeps clothing.


This is what irks me about the pro-pot people. How do you know he's still fully behind raiding MMJ dispensaries? Maybe he wasn't to begin with and let the DEA to do their business. Maybe now he'll change his tune having been reelected only a week ago, but nothing is certain and is only speculation. I just absolutely hate these kind of posts where people think they know what is going through Pres. Obama's mind. Also, him having toked before is irrelevant.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Obama could prevent drone strikes, yet can't stop the DEA from arresting people who smoke pot.

ok.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

When Bush does terrible things he's an awful oppressive war criminal. When Obama does them he is a MAN OF MYSTERY with too complex a mind for us mere mortals to judge or condemn.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

They know the LIBERTY Movement is the future, and I think they're realizing they can't prevent America's Great Awakening from happening. 

It's happening, brothers. Hang on tight, because the RANDslide in 2016 is happening.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Libertarianism isn't a "challenge" the GOP needs to "buckle down on". It's the future ya dumb old cunts.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Its also the past ironically enough


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

That is true, Redead.


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> When Bush does terrible things he's an awful oppressive war criminal. When Obama does them he is a MAN OF MYSTERY with too complex a mind for us mere mortals to judge or condemn.


Well Bush never really did anything, because he was a puppet.


----------



## Zen (Nov 11, 2006)

Now is where the real challenge begins


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Some inconvenient truths for Obama supporters I don't expect them to listen to.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

The crazy looking lady again.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

I have an immediate distrust of anti-choice women.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Asenath said:


> I have an immediate distrust of anti-choice women.


Where does Julie Borowski say she's pro-life?


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Where does Julie Borowski say she's pro-life?


In her comments section.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Seems funny that liberals are pro-abortion when their greatest asset are being killed off at the highest rate, future black voters


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Asenath said:


> In her comments section.


I can't find it.

In any case, I'd like to hear some specific contentions to her points if anyone has any.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

Mithro said:


> Seems funny that liberals are pro-abortion when their greatest asset are being killed off at the highest rate, future black voters


what the hell


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

She says she's anti-abortion (she's asked if she's pro-abortion or anti-abortion). It's on page 8. Yeah I read through the comments to find it.

You can interpret that as pro-life I guess, or just that abortion is disgusting and awful. I'd guess she wants to leave it up to the states.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Redead said:


> what the hell


Lots of dark colored folk are getting abortions, more than whites, and these dark colored folk are a nice voting block for the democrats.

The black population really started to go into recess around the time abortion became legal, partially because of abortion, alongside them becoming more civil, thus not having a whole litter by the time they're in their 20's.

While I do think abortion is immoral, I do find it effective at cleaning up America, so I often find myself at a crossroad, in a way.

I hope this comment helped make sense of my earlier statement.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

As a percentage yes but whites still have more abortions overall

and it doesnt change the fact that the tone of your comment is pretty racist


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Mithro said:


> The black population really started to go into recess around the time abortion became legal, partially because of abortion, alongside them becoming more civil, thus not having a whole litter by the time they're in their 20's.
> 
> While I do think abortion is immoral, I do find it effective at cleaning up America, so I often find myself at a crossroad, in a way.


what the hell

@MrMister I still can't find it.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Redead said:


> As a percentage yes but whites still have more abortions overall
> 
> and it doesnt change the fact that the tone of your comment is pretty racist


You're right, but whites are about 60-something percent of the population, and blacks make up 12 percent of the population.

Sorry if my comments sound racist, but Planned Parenthood was started by certain racists for the purpose of thinning out the colored in America, I'm just telling it how it is, pal.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mithro said:


> Planned Parenthood was started by certain racists for the purpose of thinning out the colored in America


Sadly that's the truth. One of the early feminists Margaret Sanger made the eugenics movement more popular and specifically wanted to target black people with Planned Parenthood. There's a reason why over 80% of the Planned Parenthood centers are in minority neighborhoods.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

It was pretty much you implying you're glad black people get aborted. That's why you were warned.

Terms like "colored" and "dark colored folk" are offensive as well. This isn't 1942.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Yeah, it's 1984.


----------



## reDREDD (Oct 12, 2008)

So if planned parenthood 'thins out' the black population as you described, shouldnt you be in favour of them?


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

I was trying to sound racist to open up dialogue/peopels about this, I like to play roles on the internet, I'm not actually for abortion for this reason.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Pretty sure we can have discussions on this forum without one party being extra racist or otherwise controversial.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Mithro said:


> I was trying to sound racist to open up dialogue/peopels about this, I like to play roles on the internet, I'm not actually for abortion for this reason.


:kobe Sure you were...


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> Pretty sure we can have discussions on this forum without one party being extra racist or otherwise controversial.


Sorry, trolling, and being provocative for no good reason is just second nature to me. I'm often on less civil parts of the internet, so I forget how to act on more civil forums.



kobra860 said:


> :kobe Sure you were...


Haha, believe what you will.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> Sadly that's the truth. One of the early feminists Margaret Sanger made the eugenics movement more popular and specifically wanted to target black people with Planned Parenthood. There's a reason why over 80% of the Planned Parenthood centers are in minority neighborhoods.


Actually, not so much. In fact, Margaret Sanger was an ally of civil rights leaders like W.E.B. DuBois and Martin Luther King, Jr. - because birth control is the best way that a woman born into poverty or marginalized by society can improve her situation.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Asenath said:


> Actually, not so much. In fact, Margaret Sanger was an ally of civil rights leaders like W.E.B. DuBois and Martin Luther King, Jr. - because birth control is the best way that a woman born into poverty or marginalized by society can improve her situation.


Maybe you should give this a quick look, and read her actual quotes before you make up your mind.

http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Mithro said:


> Maybe you should give this a quick look, and read her actual quotes before you make up your mind.
> 
> http://www.blackgenocide.org/sanger.html


That site is not reputable in the least. Here's a factcheck.org report on the same allegation.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/cains-false-attack-on-planned-parenthood/


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> Actually, not so much. In fact, Margaret Sanger was an ally of civil rights leaders like W.E.B. DuBois and Martin Luther King, Jr. - because birth control is the best way that a woman born into poverty or marginalized by society can improve her situation.


Please. She didn't give a damn about black women and black people as a whole. The only reason some feminists rode on the momentum of Civil Rights is because the Civil Rights leaders were making a lot of progress. Notice that the feminist movement really began to pick up in the late 60s and early 70s after the success of the Civil Rights movement.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Asenath said:


> That site is not reputable in the least. Here's a factcheck.org report on the same allegation.
> 
> http://www.factcheck.org/2011/11/cains-false-attack-on-planned-parenthood/


How about we get her opinion, and her words when it comes down to it?

http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Curious if Asenath believes women should have free (free meaning paid for by everyone) birth control.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> Please. She didn't give a damn about black women and black people as a whole.


Then why was she advocating for education, birth control, and better care for and information to pregnant women in the black community as early as the 30s?


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

CamillePunk said:


> Curious if Asenath believes women should have free (free meaning paid for by everyone) birth control.


I believe if a woman pays for health insurance, birth control should be covered as preventative care. (And yes, theoretically, it should be free - I'm frankly shocked every day that the US doesn't have some form of Nationalized health care, like all the other Developed nations.)


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> Then why was she advocating for education, birth control, and better care for and information to pregnant women in the black community as early as the 30s?


Do you have any unbiased sources to verify that?


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Mithro said:


> How about we get her opinion, and her words when it comes down to it?
> 
> http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm


Sorry, but most of those quotes are either made up entirely or hatchet-jobbed out of context.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> Do you have any unbiased sources to verify that?


Sanger's work, and her own quotes on the subject, are covered here under the heading "The ***** Project." 

http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/PPFA/Margaret_Sanger_Hero_1009.pdf



> … a group notoriously underprivileged and
> handicapped to a large measure by a ‘caste’
> system that operates as an added weight
> upon their efforts to get a fair share of the
> ...


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Asenath said:


> Sorry, but most of those quotes are either made up entirely or hatchet-jobbed out of context.


Give me a goddamn break, those are her words, they are all over the web, yeah, we don't have video or audio back then to completely confirm them, but we don't have those for most things back then.

You'll just say everything you disagree with is made up.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Mithro said:


> Give me a goddamn break, those are her words, they are all over the web, yeah, we don't have video or audio back then to completely confirm them, but we don't have those for most things back then.
> 
> You'll just say everything you disagree with is made up.


There is a HUGE body of Sanger's writings and recorded lectures.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> Sorry, but most of those quotes are either made up entirely or hatchet-jobbed out of context.


She's done speeches for the KKK. Those quotes aren't too far from her true beliefs.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

> "We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the ***** population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon


This is Her Struggle.

No clue if she actually said this or not. It's hard to trust random websites that may or may not have certain agendas.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> She's done speeches for the KKK. Those quotes aren't too far from her true beliefs.


Those claims have been thoroughly debunked by historians not appalled by the fact that a woman might want to control her fertility or her body.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

What a strong, independent woman.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

That looks fake.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

MrMister said:


> This is Her Struggle.
> 
> No clue if she actually said this or not. It's hard to trust random websites that may or may not have certain agendas.


The first part of a quote was written in a letter to a black minister who was helping her introduce the idea of birth control to his community to empower it. Since she did work in an era where racist eugenicists _were_ advocating ideas like that, it seems like a sane precaution.

The second part of the quote is made up.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> Those claims have been thoroughly debunked by historians not appalled by the fact that a woman might want to control her fertility or her body.


No they haven't. This is an excerpt from her own autobiography.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

CamillePunk said:


> That looks fake.


She was known to speak with the KKK, and it's well-known that she surrounded herself with incredible racists, it doesn't matter if it's fake, to be honest.



kobra860 said:


> No they haven't. This is an excerpt from her own autobiography.


It doesn't matter how much evidence you present her, she'll just ignore it, and say it's been made up, or debunked.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

That video is posted by "rosaryfilms" - I cannot believe that it was not edited or rigged by an anti-choice Youtuber.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> That video is posted by "rosaryfilms" - I cannot believe that it was not edited or rigged by an anti-choice Youtuber.


It was from her autobiography. Numerous other sources have used that part of her book to highlight her connection with the KKK.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

So, exactly what is your ideological problem with women having full control of the biological processes of their own bodies, anyway?


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> That looks fake.


Your insight serves you well. It is fake.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> So, exactly what is your ideological problem with women having full control of the biological processes of their own bodies, anyway?


I don't have a problem with it. However, I'm not going to overlook the fact that early feminism had racist origins.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

kobra860 said:


> I don't have a problem with it. However, I'm not going to overlook the fact that early feminism had racist origins.


Liberty is not a zero sum game. Black men don't lose liberty because women gain it.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Asenath said:


> Liberty is not a zero sum game. Black men don't lose liberty because women gain it.


No one said that.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

CamillePunk said:


> That looks fake.


I'm tempted to photoshop lebron's face on there but I dont want to get banned.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Mithro said:


> She was known to speak with the KKK, and it's well-known that she surrounded herself with incredible racists, it doesn't matter if it's fake, to be honest.


Of course it matters. It's the difference between having photo evidence of her speaking at a KKK rally and not.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

The picture wasn't even needed. There's plenty of evidence from her own autobiography and her other works.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Fine, maybe that's true, I have no idea. But it still matters whether or not it's fake. Obviously is though. Maybe he wasn't trying to use it as evidence, IDK.


----------



## Mithro (Oct 14, 2011)

Sorry, guys, I was just t-trying to contribute. Hutz


----------



## Karma101 (Sep 7, 2012)

Abortion needs to be legal for the same reason pencils need erasers.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Asenath said:


> So, exactly what is your ideological problem with women having full control of the biological processes of their own bodies, anyway?


Where on earth did you get that from? Kobra never said anything like that. He was just pointing out facts that the feminist movement did indeed have racist origins. He never said anything like that, and nobody said anything like this either:



> Liberty is not a zero sum game. Black men don't lose liberty because women gain it.


Nobody is arguing over whether or not a woman should have the right to an abortion and/or birth control. They're arguing over whether or not the founder of Planned Parenthood was a racist, which she was.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

GOON The Legend said:


> Where on earth did you get that from? Kobra never said anything like that. He was just pointing out facts that the feminist movement did indeed have racist origins. He never said anything like that, and nobody said anything like this either:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody is arguing over whether or not a woman should have the right to an abortion and/or birth control. They're arguing over whether or not the founder of Planned Parenthood was a racist, which she was.


Women don't deserve the right to an abortion. The Government has every right to tell a woman what to do with her body. I am an atheist, and so I have no religious attachment to this subject at all. If you don't want a child don't have sex, and no birth control doesn't always work. People are irresponsible, and I think those people should be punished. More than half of these woman call themselves Christians, and yet they are having sex while not married. What about the life in her body? It doesn't get a chance? Having an abortion is a selfish act that irresponsible woman use to get away from facing a reality they don't want.

Don't give me the rape, or incest argument either. They can still give the child up to an orphanage. These women think that it would be horrible for a child to live with the fact knowing how they came in to this world by rape, or incest. However, that's a choice that the child will eventually learn to deal with on their own. Basically when a woman tells the Government she has the right to make decisions regarding her body ends up sounding like a hypocrite because she is taking the right to make a decision for someone else that she clearly doesn't want to give birth to. Abortion is wrong because women end up sounding like hypocrites when push comes to shove. A typical feminists "You can't tell me what to do with my body, but I can dictate the well being of the fetus inside of me". I call that bullshit.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Oh good someone we can all come together and disagree with.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

CamillePunk said:


> Oh good someone we can all come together and disagree with.


You probably think I am a Neoconservative, but I am as far left as you can possibly get. However, with Abortion that is not the case. My only argument for abortion is that studies have shown that when Abortion is made legal less abortions happen, but that's not so much the case here in the States. In poor nations I can make the argument as to why Abortion should be made be legal. However we live in the States so I won't make that argument.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

truk83 said:


> Women don't deserve the right to an abortion. The Government has every right to tell a woman what to do with her body. I am an atheist, and so I have no religious attachment to this subject at all. If you don't want a child don't have sex, and no birth control doesn't always work. People are irresponsible, and I think those people should be punished. More than half of these woman call themselves Christians, and yet they are having sex while not married. What about the life in her body? It doesn't get a chance? Having an abortion is a selfish act that irresponsible woman use to get away from facing a reality they don't want.
> 
> Don't give me the rape, or incest argument either. They can still give the child up to an orphanage. These women think that it would be horrible for a child to live with the fact knowing how they came in to this world by rape, or incest. However, that's a choice that the child will eventually learn to deal with on their own. Basically when a woman tells the Government she has the right to make decisions regarding her body ends up sounding like a hypocrite because she is taking the right to make a decision for someone else that she clearly doesn't want to give birth to. Abortion is wrong because women end up sounding like hypocrites when push comes to shove. A typical feminists "You can't tell me what to do with my body, but I can dictate the well being of the fetus inside of me". I call that bullshit.


Why do you want the government to run and regulate the lives of people?

EDIT- You admitted you're far left. That explains everything.


----------



## Comrade Chico (Nov 8, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


> Why do you want the government to run and regulate the lives of people?
> 
> EDIT- You admitted you're far left. That explains everything.


And far-left is pro-establishment/goverment power? Lol wtf?


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

GOON The Legend said:


> Why do you want the government to run and regulate the lives of people?
> 
> EDIT- You admitted you're far left. That explains everything.


This shows just how unintelligent you are. That is exactly the Governments job. Who do you think makes law? What are laws? Regulation is a part of any Government. Read a book on Governments, and then come talk to me. Remember Americans put these members of the House, and Senate in to office. When you complain about the Government regulating their lives you sound like a fool. It's not like we don't vote, and these people aren't just thrown in to office. This isn't some Private company where officials aren't elected via a Democratic Election. You also have no clue as to how many laws that are enforced on you, are actually pushed on our Government by Private Corporations. Have you ever heard of business law?

You, like many other unintelligent people would be shocked to know who was actually pushing to have our rights taken from us via our very own Government. It typically isn't the Government coming up with these ideas. You have Lobbyists pushing for the Agendas of the Private Sector. Just take a look at how many laws are made each year, and then come tell me how free of a country we live in. Without regulation our nation would collapse. If you think otherwise you haven't read enough books on the matter. This has nothing to do with far left politics, or far right politics.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

“…a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” – Thomas Jefferson

“The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” – Patrick Henry

“I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them.” – Thomas Jefferson

P. sure that that the federal government isn't meant to run the lives of other people, but it's not my fault that the federal government has gone off the rails.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Omit the personal shots truk83. It's not a bad post if you get rid of that bullshit.


----------



## bigbuxxx (May 28, 2011)

Karma101 said:


> Abortion needs to be legal for the same reason pencils need erasers.


A+


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Please watch and let Rand Paul educate you.


----------



## Vic Capri (Jun 7, 2006)




----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

GOON The Legend said:


> “…a wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government.” – Thomas Jefferson
> 
> “The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government — lest it come to dominate our lives and interests.” – Patrick Henry
> 
> ...


You are taking quotes in a time in history that is completely irrelevant in regard to this day, and age. I can't argue that the Federal Government has gotten to large, or powerful because quite frankly they have. I would prefer a decentralized form of Government. However, with that said we live in a Democracy in which we hold elections. If people have such a problem with who is in power we live in a country where we can vote them out. Unfortunately, people aren't as serious about their government as they were in 17th, and 18th century.

We know people go, and out vote because that's what makes us all feel like we have some sort of power in this country. The government has just as much right to make laws that you, and plenty of other people may, or may not agree with. In this case Americans should be less concerned with just voting people in, and more concerned with whom they are actually voting for. You can sit here, and say that our Government is tyrannical, or evil all you'd like. It doesn't eliminate the fact that Americans put that "tyrant" of a Government in to power.

All to often I a see people blame Obama as if he provides jobs, or as if he is responsible for the last 50 years of corruption. We are not a dictatorship, and that's despite what Alex Jones may be telling you. Unfortunately, people have no one to blame, but themselves. It's so easy just to point the finger at the "Government", and say it's their fault. On one hand you all say things like "It's not the Governments job to create jobs". Then on the other hand, you all criticize the Obama Administration for not creating enough jobs. Which one is it?

I happen to believe that the Government has every right to create jobs. In fact when the government does create jobs it's usually contracted out to some private company. My problem with our government is that it allows for larger corporations to not pay taxes the ways in which we pay our own taxes. For example since Wal Mart started nearly 1/3 of all Wal Marts in the United States were paid for by government subsidies. Meaning taxpayers built Wal Marts, you know the largest, and most profitable retailer in the world. If you did some reading yourself you would find that there are Super Center Wal Marts paying less property tax than you, or I do for our homes. Thanks Government.

These are the types of things that piss me off about our Government. Our government, and thus the taxpayers are the largest middle man in the world today, except we normally end up getting screwed. My uncle is a Store Manager at Wal Mart, his store pays out $174 a month in property tax. You have any idea how large a Wal Mart is? I used to own a small business, and I nearly shit myself when I found this out because I was paying 6 times that amount for less than 1500 square ft, and that was in the 90's. You wonder why small business die, and it becomes very clear once you do a little research.

A private energy company, Entergy is another example of a big business taking your tax dollars, and profiting largely from them. It is said that over 200 million dollars in taxes were found to be an overcharge. In fact it was happening all to often in states like Texas, Louisiana, Alabama etc. Taxpayers were being charged for utility lines that weren't even built, and this goes back years. More recently was hurricane Katrina where it was becoming quite clear how bad taxpayers had been taken advantage of.

Do you also believe that it's a privilege to have health care as well? People like you are the problem. It's a born right to have health care, and free health care to boot. We are the only country that treats our health care like a business. Don't give me that "I don't want the government telling me what health care to have" of an argument either. If that's what you believe then you are obviously unaware of what a government run health care program is. For starters non-government health care businesses are opposed to it because they now know they have to compete with our government.

If you know anything about Capitalists, you would know they hate competition. That is why public opinion towards Obama Care is so negative. I have two doctors in my family, and 4 registered nurses. Not one doctor would ever turn a patient away from surgery that could save their life. However, if that person does not have health insurance then the hospital has to eat that bill. Why? Because if you don't have health care chances are you can't afford a medical bill because you don't have a job, or just don't make enough money to afford quality care.

For those who are still living under rocks let me explain. Our health care system is a mess, and that's without government interference. Meaning the private sector has been gauging their customers for years, and not to mention dropping people from their coverage. You know the "death panels" that members of the Conservative party were claiming were in the United States government. Many private health insurance companies drop folks, or simply refuse to give them insurance based on preexisting conditions. Many of you thought that this is what the government will do, but once again turn a blind eye to the fact that it's already happening with the private sector.

The difference between the private sector, and our government is very obvious. If the government is doing something we don't like, we vote them out. We don't have that type of power of private entities. Hence, the reason why I say if we are going to submit out power to any large establishment it should likely be the one that we have "power" over. Once again we have democratic elections, and we the people can make change. The problem with our government in regards to who has control is more likely the reason why people don't trust their government. Today, if you don't have a special interest group, or lobbyists down in DC you won't have much of a say in anything.

It's not like one person goes down to D.C, and makes change. Money talks, and money also makes legislation. Special Interest groups, and lobbyists are showing us the people how to use your government. Nearly $10,000,000 a day is lobbied from our government to mainly larger private establishments. Many of you bitch about welfare for the poor, and claim that out government pays people to do nothing. While I will admit there are people taking advantage of a system in which they get hardly any money to begin with. The facts of the matter are this, 1/3 of people on welfare are actually people with actual disabilities. A quarter of those people actually work part time. The rest are students, and elderly people. 

You act as if collecting welfare is the life, and people are living big because of it. The reality is this. We give more money to the very wealthiest 1/10 of %1 via subsidies, and allowing them not to pay taxes like you, and I do. Don't get me wrong the wealthy pay taxes, but they don't one third of their income. Many wealthy folks have offshore tax accounts, or as I like to call it untaxed income that they legally are allowed to have. Which makes this more interesting. Our government allows them to have offshore tax accounts. Trillions of dollars have been kept from our tax system for over 50 years. While the government does things like spend over a trillions dollars on keeping "Marijuana" out of America.

This is where I have a problem with the government. It's not welfare to the poor, it's welfare to the wealthiest people in our country. Look at all the bail outs this country has been a part of. You probably think that Obama was the first President to start handing out bail outs to the rich because that's how the media portrayed it. Meanwhile bail outs for the rich have been part of our government for years. Taxpayers have been giving their money away to the wealthy since Regan was in office. You all bitch about the government spending money it doesn't have, but then never wonder why the government has no money in the first place.

Poor, lazy people aren't the problem financially in the United States. People on welfare aren't living the high life. Greed is destroying our economy much like it's destroying other economies of the world. The private sector tells you your government needs to stay out of the way, and it does for the most part, but not in your favor. If it weren't for the government many of us would live shorter lives because the private sector could give two shits about our well being. Just look at China. Look at what little regulations they have on pollution. 

Pittsburgh used to look like a shit town, and there was soot everywhere in the beginning of the 20th century. The people spoke, and were tired of being sick, and more importantly tired of dying from lung related diseases. It took the people to stand up against the private sector back then who refused to change anything. Then, finally the government grew some balls, and began regulating them. For years while during the Industrial boom, and while the private sector was running the game we had children, and adults working in horrible working conditions. 

Once again it was the people who spoke up, and finally their government listened abolishing child labor as it was practiced during those times. What most of you don't realize is that when the government regulates industry it's usually for the safety, or well being of the people, and also it's typically people making a fuss about. Meaning it's the people who typically push for regulation from our government. The same way when Conservatives want to tell woman they have no choice over their bodies. Many Christians want our government to abolish the legality of abortion. Meaning they want to regulate abortions, or what women choose to do with their bodies.

Remember most jobs are run by the private sector, and so we can blame them for not providing us with enough jobs, and not only that, but jobs that are not at poverty level. What type of government sets a minimum wage at below poverty level? Who the fuck wants to work for $9 dollars an hour, let alone $7, and some change? Not to mention part time. Why aren't you bitching about Wal Mart intentionally giving people part time jobs, so that they can still collect welfare? You would think Wal Mart would want to help the American economy, and employ people at a livable wage, right?

Obviously not, and in fact if we didn't have a minimum wage companies like Wal Mart would pay us pennies on the dollar. That's how much they give a shit about you, or I. Why do companies like Wal Mart except food stamps? They are a Conservative company as whole, but they except food stamps. Meaning taxpayer money is ok to spend at Wal Mart. Flipping burgers doesn't require a degree, but do you eat fast food? Do you shop at a grocery store? Many of us do, and if those people weren't there we would have to grow our own food, and make our own clothes.

Despite how easy those jobs are it's not excuse to pay people less than the worth of the actual industry that they work for. McDonald's is famous fast food restaurant, and they are a world conglomerate. Billions served, but they can't pay half their workers above poverty levels? I don't care if taking someone's order is easy, or doesn't require much thought. They work for a profitable company, and that's enough of a reason for people to make more money. I expect small mom, and pop stores to pay low wages because the reality is that those businesses aren't thriving. However, as a kid I made more money working for a very small business, than I did while working for a conglomerate retailer while in school. Doesn't make sense.

The economy would do much better without billionaires, top heavy millionaires hording all the money the bring in. In fact wealthy people hardly spend their money. Most of them sit on their fortune, and allow the money that is taxed by the government to create, or keep their businesses around. They also rely on slave labor to help increase their already astronomical profits. When I had a small business I would have never of thought of paying people pennies on the dollar, however I will admit it would have saved me a ton of money. Legally here in the States you can't just pay someone pennies on the dollar to work. Unless you are the government, or the private sector in which you have prisoners working for slave wages out of jail.

If you take all the wealth made in the last 40 years by the folks you see in the Fortune 500, or the wealthiest 1/10 of %1 it's not hard to see why we have a national debt over 16 trillion, and counting. We live in a society where to many of you think that taxing the wealthy is not the option, and argue that it's poor minorities who don't work, and are giving everything for free that are the cause for our nations problems. You people couldn't be anymore wrong, and are just as ignorant as the people who thought the world was flat, and that the Sun evolved around the Earth. You are a more modern version of those people.

I used to think that there was hope until the internet proved me otherwise. I found that there are so many uninformed people of all personalities ranging from Doctors, lawyers, house wives, nurses, teachers, carpenters, janitors, and cashiers. We all point the finger as to who is the problem, and then claim their convictions without any real logic. I tried to make a difference, and realized that it was nearly impossible to do so. Many of us work to long, and possibly more than one job. Americans just don't have the time,nor the money to make a difference. Change doesn't happen over night. Change takes years, and unfortunately we have to work harder, and longer all the while ignoring the government that we elect thinking that our one vote was enough to cause change.

If you really want to cause change, stop voting. Stop going to work, stop shopping, and take the power back. Show the government, and the private sector what happens when people step out of line. However, to many of you have way to much pride (which is a sin) to do exactly those things. Without workers, the government has no taxable income, industry loses money because there is no one consuming. My house is paid off, why do I have to pay the government to keep it on property? If I didn't have property tax I could just grow my own food, and not have to work. I don't need the television, or the internet, and I know my wife could care less about those things as well.

However I have to work in order to pay my property tax, and many other taxes. I have shelter, and a means to my own heat. There are plenty of ways to rely on very little energy that are basically free once you have the supplies you need. With the amount of information out there humans could live very decent lives without the current things we deem real, or necessary. Fuck twitter, face book, and the things that keep us from being alive. We are slaves to a society that suggest we can be the best we can be, but in reality we aren't the best we can be. We are not ourselves anymore we are an absurd representation of human beings. 

We are filthy, disgusting, self righteous, ignorant, greedy souls that allow the blind to lead the blind. Never before in a society I have heard such ignorance. Just last week my brother in law was discussing a Jimmy Kimmel skit in which kids were told by their parents that they ate all their Halloween candy. As he told the story he made certain to point out that of course the "black" was more pissed off, and more violent in response. This is a man who claims to be Christian, and a devoted Catholic. I'm white, but I even thought that this is where society is now, and always will be. Just the mere fact that the color of one's skin is still an issue makes me scratch my head.

I'm certain he meant no harm in what he said because like most people he is completely unaware of his very own ignorance. This is precisely the problem. One third of the world lives without clean water, or electricity while there are people like myself are throwing food away because it was to much to eat. I am as just as guilty as the next person, but I realized that at least when I work I still know my taxes feed people. Whether they are lazy, crippled, or what have you I know that at least society as prejudice, or ignorant as it can be still feeds Americans. We still give people shelter, and we still feed them is the only thing keeping us "face".

It's clear that this attitude is changing though. More, and more people want to stop feeding the poor. More, and more people want to stop housing the poor. Peoples anger has manifested itself so much that they say "Do away with welfare". I say the same, and allow society to crumble as it was meant to. If you know anything about history you would know that the idea of leaving people behind, or in poor conditions is something Americans never were ok with. It took nearly 200 years for our nation to have a movement like the Progressive Movement. When the New Deal was written, and put in to place it spoke volumes. Our country was taking a stand, and finally putting itself first. Inner city parks, homes, apartments, libraries, and schools were built to help build this nation. 

Now let me be so I can go listen to this new awesome Soundgarden album, and re-live the 90's.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

You say that you agree that the government has gotten to large, yet you have no problem with them creating jobs, regulating healthcare, and want them to regulate business'. You've also said in other thread's that you want the government to regulate speech and you also want them to invade Uganda, thus supporting the Military-Industrial Complex.

Granted I didn't read that entire essay, but whose side are you on? Are you a statist?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Ron Paul's farewell speech LIVE now http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN/


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Watching now, Brother CP. God bless him.


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

GOON The Legend said:


> You say that you agree that the government has gotten to large, yet you have no problem with them creating jobs, regulating healthcare, and want them to regulate business'. You've also said in other thread's that you want the government to regulate speech and you also want them to invade Uganda, thus supporting the Military-Industrial Complex.
> 
> Granted I didn't read that entire essay, but whose side are you on? Are you a statist?


I want a decentralized government.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Great speech by Dr. Paul.

Here is the full transcript of the speech: http://www.campaignforliberty.org/national-blog/transcript-of-farewell-address/


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

> As was widely expected, Harry Reid tried to bring the problematic Cybersecurity Act back from the dead today. He needed 60 votes for cloture, which would have then allowed the bill to actually be debated upon (with various amendments considered as well). However, after a few short grandstanding speeches, the attempt at cloture failed, 51 votes to 47, well short of the 60 votes needed. Harry Reid then got up and lashed out at his colleagues, basically saying that he and other Cybersecurity supporters have been spreading so much FUD about how we're going to be attacked that he can't believe Senators didn't fall for it. Of course, one of the problems is that all of the fearmongering failed to actually identify the problems or threats other than to handwave about planes falling out of the sky and similar fanciful stories. Furthermore, it fails to acknowledge that rushing through a bill that has significant impacts on privacy of the public -- especially at a time when people are increasingly concerned about government snooping -- is a bad thing. Reid admitted that the cybersecurity bill in this Congress is likely "dead," though I'm sure something like it will be revived before too long. How about next time, rather than rushing it through and ignoring civil liberties, the government actually highlights the specific regulatory problems already in place, and why this bill is needed -- and does so while including civil liberties advocates in the discussions?


http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20...n.shtml?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Liberty wins, at least for now.


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

truk83 said:


> You are taking quotes in a time in history that is completely irrelevant in regard to this day, and age. I can't argue that the Federal Government has gotten to large, or powerful because quite frankly they have. I would prefer a decentralized form of Government. However, with that said we live in a Democracy in which we hold elections. If people have such a problem with who is in power we live in a country where we can vote them out. Unfortunately, people aren't as serious about their government as they were in 17th, and 18th century.
> 
> We know people go, and out vote because that's what makes us all feel like we have some sort of power in this country. The government has just as much right to make laws that you, and plenty of other people may, or may not agree with. In this case Americans should be less concerned with just voting people in, and more concerned with whom they are actually voting for. You can sit here, and say that our Government is tyrannical, or evil all you'd like. It doesn't eliminate the fact that Americans put that "tyrant" of a Government in to power.
> 
> ...


You say for now that you're OK with all this. I guarantee you that will change once you see what Obamacare does to our health care system and to our economy. The "death panels" may not be what we make them out to be, but there will come a time when they will ration out health care and decide who lives and who dies. That is the situation everywhere that has a national health care system. If Canada and Britain, for example, have it so great, why do they have people come to this country for procedures. By the time they would get treatment in their country, they'd be dead. 

Government overreach spells trouble, it means less freedom, not more. I prefer to live in a society where busting my ass and making an honest dollar means something. Not to mention I want the government for the most part to leave me the hell alone. I'm for paying my fair share and I'm sure the rest of the working folks are OK with that. Problem is that success seems to be punished now, not rewarded. 

As for the voting in of who we have currently, I am pretty sure most of the country will sing a different tune 4 years from now. Hopefully by then, it's not too late to save this country.


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

FISCAL CLIFF


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

GRAND BARGAIN


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://rt.com/news/gaza-israel-hamas-attack-687/

Batten down the hatches, brothers. This will only get worse.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

For some reason I don't think killing civilians to show that killing civilians is unacceptable will work.


----------



## i$e (Dec 5, 2006)




----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Damn shame they weren't smart enough to see that they were the same candidate.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

There's a war going on in Afghanistan, reports The Onion.

Nation Horrified To Learn About War In Afghanistan While Reading Up On Petraeus Sex Scandal

http://www.theonion.com/articles/nation-horrified-to-learn-about-war-in-afghanistan,30367/


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Wait, are you trying to tell ME that Obama is continuing Bush's wars?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

nah man when Obama was elected he ended all the wars NOBEL PEACE PRIZE


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Good, thanks for confirming that. Was getting worried that Obama was the same as Bush or something like that.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

God no, can't have the first black president be called a war criminal for doing all the thing Bush (who was called a war criminal) did and more. That'd be racist.


----------



## i$e (Dec 5, 2006)

Loving the Republican Idiot gimmicks you've got going on.

Colour me impressed.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

They're not Republicans. They're LOLbertarians. There's a difference. Republicans jerk off to Pat Robertson. LOLbertarians jack off to Ayn Rand.


----------



## i$e (Dec 5, 2006)

Ah, even worse than I originally thought then. 

Still an impressive display of public ignorance, though.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

PS. I love your panda.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

b/c not supporting a war criminal and a man with an awful record when it comes to civil liberties makes us ignorant, right?

with that said, you have a right to support that man, even with the evidence out there to support our claims.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

i$e said:


> Still an impressive display of public ignorance, though.


How about elaborating and providing specific counter-points instead of just generally insulting people you disagree with?


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Senator Rand Paul fighting for your liberties once again. 

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-acti...bill-until-his-amendment-is-included-in-votes

Pretty much my take on this whole Petraeus scandal:


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

CamillePunk said:


> How about elaborating and providing specific counter-points instead of just generally insulting people you disagree with?


What is this, common sense? :terry 

Come on CP, you know we have no time for that here.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

That Rand Paul is just another example of the right wing being OFF THE RAILS! We don't need our civil liberties. What we DO need is more undeclared wars and bills like the NDAA to keep those hoodlums in check!



> “[Democrats are] not the cause for why the defense authorization bill is not being brought to the floor.”


Aren't the Democrats supposed to be the party that is for civil liberties, yet it's a bi-partisan effort to ram this bill through the Senate and RAND stands alone and is trying to guarantee that our sixth amendment rights aren't violated. Shit, at least Republicans are open about most of the stuff they want, such as more wars and civil liberty violations. Democrats will tell you they're anti-war and then go ahead and authorize drone strikes. Democrats will tell you they're against your civil liberties being violated, yet they'll go ahead and reauthorize the Patriot Act. 

Both the Republican and Democratic Parties are exactly the same with the exception on some social issues that should be left up to the states anyway. Befuddles me how some people still believe there is a real difference. Take the red pill, brothers.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

Wait didn't Ayn Rand hold libertarianism in extreme contempt? Why do libertarians hold her in high esteem? Or do they? Genuine question. Maybe I should be a libertarian then. Her philosophy is abhorrent.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=education_campus_libertarians

Yeah, Ayn Rand doesn't like Libertarians. 

http://www.atlassociety.org/libertarianism-and-objectivism-compatible

Here is an article that tries to explain the differences between the two. Objectivism isn't Libertarianism, and Libertarianism isn't Objectivism.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MrMister said:


> Wait didn't Ayn Rand hold libertarianism in extreme contempt? Why do libertarians hold her in high esteem? Or do they? Genuine question.


Many do but the idea that libertarians "jack off to Ayn Rand" is as ignorant as the idea Republicans "jack off to Pat Robertson". Just a mindless caricature being imposed by someone incapable of having a political discussion with people they disagree with. I wish we had some liberals in this thread who didn't resort to ad hominem attacks and actually were willing to make arguments based on facts so we could have a real discussion instead of 9QA-style political team sports warfare.

I watch videos and read articles by liberals all the time (as well as more modern conservatives and even anarchists) and there are some points where I can agree or sympathize. I absolutely wish that possibility existed in this thread as well. It'd be cool if you as a mod would enforce that type of mentality in this thread to encourage discussion, but that might be too much effort to exert for just one thread.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Here's a short video about the deadliness of sanctions placed on foreign countries. Featuring guest appearances by Barack PEACE PRIZE Obama and Mittens Obamney. 






And another by the same account about Iran's Nuclear Program.






:hmm: Wots Uh The Deal?


----------



## BruiserKC (Mar 14, 2010)

GOON The Legend said:


> http://rt.com/news/gaza-israel-hamas-attack-687/
> 
> Batten down the hatches, brothers. This will only get worse.


Looks like Israel is ready to finish Hamas once and for all. They are calling up 75,000 reserves and are fully preparing a ground invasion of Gaza. Plus, the rest of the world hasn't been as strong with the condemnation as expected as seeing how there is minimum civilian casualties in Israel's retaliation against Hamas.

For now, President Obama has been telling Egypt to stay out. Apparently, in spite of the fact the Egyptian people hate us, they still enjoy all that aid and assistance we send them. If Egypt does somehow become involved, we can start balancing our budget by cutting off all that $.


----------



## Muerte al fascismo (Feb 3, 2008)

Israel's leaders are just election posturing. It always ramps up the violence for domestic audiences. This is obvious by Israel killing the leader who severely limited rocket attacks these past few years.

All this proves why a Two-State solution will never work, just as it would've never worked in South Africa.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

i$e said:


>


Oh yeah, just like the 10 (it's more, but for the sake of the picture) cities with the highest crime rates voted, overwhelmingly, for Obama.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

Punked Up said:


> Oh yeah, just like the 10 (it's more, but for the sake of the picture) cities with the highest crime rates voted, overwhelmingly, for Obama.


What correlation are you trying to make?


----------



## #Mark (Dec 31, 2011)

Man fuck Israel


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> Here's a short video about the deadliness of sanctions placed on foreign countries. Featuring guest appearances by Barack PEACE PRIZE Obama and Mittens Obamney.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


MORE FATAL THAN THE ATOMIC BOMB :lmao

Except atomic bombs kill people instantly and irradiate the environment. Those videos also need to go into detail on how sanctions murder people. They just say it and we're supposed to believe it. OK British narrator! I mean yeah we can read between the lines, but if they're going to make claims as absurd as sanctions being more dangerous than the most dangerous weapons on the planet they need to go into a bit of detail.

Sanction holocaust > nuclear holocaust.


----------



## 1andOnlyDobz! (Jan 3, 2011)

Punked Up said:


> Oh yeah, just like the 10 (it's more, but for the sake of the picture) cities with the highest crime rates voted, overwhelmingly, for Obama.


Well crime and voting doesn't exactly have much correlation. I would say there's a better link between education and voting.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Considering the strong liberal bias in our colleges among professors I'm not surprised by that chart. Not that educated Republicans would have much reason to vote Romney anyway. He's not a conservative and from his record was an obvious flip-flopper a la John Kerry. 



MrMister said:


> MORE FATAL THAN THE ATOMIC BOMB :lmao
> 
> Except atomic bombs kill people instantly and irradiate the environment. Those videos also need to go into detail on how sanctions murder people. They just say it and we're supposed to believe it. OK British narrator! I mean yeah we can read between the lines, but if they're going to make claims as absurd as sanctions being more dangerous than the most dangerous weapons on the planet they need to go into a bit of detail.
> 
> Sanction holocaust > nuclear holocaust.


Obviously atomic bombs are more destructive. However it's pretty easy to figure out that when you initiate force to prevent a country from receiving basic goods for its people (which should be considered an act of war), a shit ton of people are going to die. They're going to starve from a lack of food and die from diseases that could have otherwise been treated had they had more medical supplies. Especially in countries in the middle east where you have leaders who are going to stockpile what supplies they have for themselves and let the people eat cake, so to speak. 

I don't place much value in the 1,000,000 dead figure, but it's important to remember when you hear presidential candidates patting each other on the back over tough sanctions on other countries, they're talking about playing a hand in many children starving to death. Same as high-fiving over increased drone strikes. Innocent people are dying. Stop high-fiving, you psychopaths.

But no, these countries hate us because of our FREEDOMS.


----------



## Dub (Dec 4, 2008)

Not all liberals are bias, stop generalizing.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I didn't say that but OK.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

CamillePunk said:


> Considering the strong liberal bias in our colleges among professors I'm not surprised by that chart. Not that educated Republicans would have much reason to vote Romney anyway. He's not a conservative and from his record was an obvious flip-flopper a la John Kerry.
> 
> Obviously atomic bombs are more destructive. However it's pretty easy to figure out that when you initiate force to prevent a country from receiving basic goods for its people (which should be considered an act of war), a shit ton of people are going to die. They're going to starve from a lack of food and die from diseases that could have otherwise been treated had they had more medical supplies. Especially in countries in the middle east where you have leaders who are going to stockpile what supplies they have for themselves and let the people eat cake, so to speak.
> 
> ...


Yeah I realize they're using hyperbole to get their point across, but they need to get specific too. They need to cite facts and sources that tie in cause and effect. Maybe there are other videos where they do that, but those videos you posted make them look ridiculous despite using a guy with a British accent as a narrator. British accents always make things seem more serious and credible.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

MrMister said:


> Yeah I realize they're using hyperbole to get their point across, but they need to get specific too. They need to cite facts and sources that tie in cause and effect. Maybe there are other videos where they do that, but those videos you posted make them look ridiculous despite using a guy with a British accent as a narrator. British accents always make things seem more serious and credible.


I believe the purpose of these videos is to provoke individuals into opening their eyes and doing research on the topics themselves to see that sanctions are not harmless, and they absolutely constitute acts of war. Right now when someone mentions sanctions it kind of passes over among the general populace as a relatively harmless word. They might think "oh well, good, we're hurting their economy", but they don't think about the deaths. They don't think about the blowback of being directly responsible for many deaths in other countries. 

As with funding civil wars, installing puppet regimes, using drone strikes, and otherwise completely violating the sovereignty of other nations and their people, you're going to piss people off and make them hate you, and sooner or later somebody is gonna figure out a way to hurt you by flying planes into your skyscrapers. Then to appease the masses we have presidents coming out trying to convince us this all happens due to a cultural or religious divide, instead of holding us accountable for our god-awful foreign policy over the decades.


----------



## Huganomics (Mar 12, 2010)

#RiseAboveIsrael

Or just support its "right to defend itself", like our oh so peaceful president does.


----------



## Bubzeh (May 25, 2011)

This thread...


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

CamillePunk said:


> Considering the strong liberal bias in our colleges among professors I'm not surprised by that chart. Not that educated Republicans would have much reason to vote Romney anyway. He's not a conservative and from his record was an obvious flip-flopper a la John Kerry.
> 
> Obviously atomic bombs are more destructive. However it's pretty easy to figure out that when you initiate force to prevent a country from receiving basic goods for its people (which should be considered an act of war), a shit ton of people are going to die. They're going to starve from a lack of food and die from diseases that could have otherwise been treated had they had more medical supplies. Especially in countries in the middle east where you have leaders who are going to stockpile what supplies they have for themselves and let the people eat cake, so to speak.
> 
> ...



I would say to a certain extent that sanctions are more harmful because no one really cares to know what they really are. It's like a quiet way to kill people, and not just killing them, but simply starving them to death. That's about as nasty as it can get since food is a basic necessity for life. Not only that, but we throw millions of tons of food away here in the States as well each. Denying children the right to eat is morally wrong. Doesn't surprise me though, we are talking about the United States Government.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

Here's a great post-election debate regarding the war on drugs.

http://fora.tv/2012/11/14/Debate_Should_the_US_Legalize_Drugs


----------



## truk83 (Jul 22, 2009)

CamillePunk said:


> Here's a great post-election debate regarding the war on drugs.
> 
> http://fora.tv/2012/11/14/Debate_Should_the_US_Legalize_Drugs


I dunno, I just think this a one sided argument in which the opposition end up looking like hypocrites. The amount of money spent on drugs coming in should be enough for the Conservatives to scream bloody murder. It's the Federal Government that spends all this money, but I don't hear Conservatives saying anything about that. Most take this "moral" stance on drugs, which is complete emotional bullshit that isn't backed by facts.

Drugs should be legal, plain, and simple. Legal with vast regulation on harder drugs like Crack, or Heroin. Since they are illegal there is no real control over them, but merely costs (our taxes) that helps put our government in the hole each year. Since 1952 we have spent over one trillion dollars on marijuana alone. Regulate these drugs so that "bad heroin", or any bad drug doesn't hit the streets. Drug dealers will cut almost anything with certain drugs these days because the drugs are becoming more expensive, and it's the only way to make a profit.

When you make drugs legal you stop a large amount of crime as well. Dealers will have nothing else to sell. I'm sure they will find something else, but drugs won't be the answer. Not unless they are stealing them. In essence we pay no more tax dollars to house these people in jails. It would costs less to pay for them to get well as opposed to jailing them. Jailing drug offenders is costly, and I am tired of paying more in taxes to keep some junkie in jail, not getting well, but getting more drugs in jail. The system is so broken.


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)




----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

1andOnlyDobz! said:


> Well crime and voting doesn't exactly have much correlation. I would say there's a better link between education and voting.


Well, I disagree. (Sorry for a very late reply)..most voters aren't exactly too tuned in, and the extent of what they'll know is covered on the surface level of the debates, the rest to them is just noise. The average voter has about as much political knowledge as someone from those states (I know I'm wording this badly, sorry it's hard to say). Cities with the most urban/minority voters (with the most crime) practically won Obama the election (Romney could have won Colorado, Nevada, Florida, etc. had it not been for a handful of cities.

Also, the states with the highest welfare (NY, Cali, etc.) voted overwhelmingly for Obama. That's telling. Gotta get their Obama bucks.


----------



## Punked Up (Feb 12, 2012)

Oh, I know it's early...but I can't help myself  Who do you guys think will run on either side in 2016? Anything can happen of course, but now I reckon Hilary will decide against running and we'll get some combination of Biden/Warren/Patrick/Castro/Cuomo vs. a combination of Rubio/Rice/Jindal/Paul/Christie/Pence etc.


----------



## Asenath (Oct 3, 2012)

Biden is an excellent Vice President, in that he says things the President is too polite to say and gives no fucks, because what are they gonna do? Fire him? But the things that make him an excellent VP are why he could never run for the top spot. I don't think the Democratic candidate in 2016 is even on the radar yet. Clinton came out of nowhere, as did Obama. It seems to work better that way.

As for the Republicans, it will be one old white guy in the pocket of big business and one neocon extremist with ridiculous beliefs. That's the formula. They don't want to mix it up.


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)

GOON The Legend said:


>


This would be a perfect "Look at all the fucks I give" photo. lol.


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

That Romney pic is gold. I chuckle every time I see it.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

The GOAT's take on the FISCAL CLIFF:


----------



## kobra860 (Jan 29, 2005)




----------



## Comrade Chico (Nov 8, 2012)

GOON The Legend said:


>


*** looks mighty humbled now :lmao


----------



## MrMister (Mar 11, 2005)

You don't even need Obama doing the not impressed face. Romney's beat down look is more than enough.


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

I wonder if the media would have dared to publish a photo of Romney GETTING HIS OWN GAS during the campaign. That might contradict the NARRATIVE.


----------



## Headliner (Jun 24, 2004)

The way he looks you would think he's on the brink of a mental breakdown.


----------



## itssoeasy23 (Jul 19, 2011)

GOON The Legend said:


>


:lmao


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

http://www.france24.com/en/20121126...in-afghanistan-past-2014-isaf-nato-withdrawal


----------



## CamillePunk (Feb 10, 2011)

How about instead of keeping 10,000 troops in Afghanistan post-2014 we keep zero troops in Afghanistan post-the end of this sentence?


----------



## GOON (Jan 23, 2010)

Got to keep spreading democracy, brother.


----------



## JenksIX (Oct 24, 2010)

kobra860 said:


>


Lmao. 

Fuck Romney. Cuba and Headliner said it perfectly.


----------

