View Full Version : 2012 Elections in the USA
Now that we are hours away from the end, could a Madaho's expert please give me a good $ figure for an evening's fun with take out? I know that the often blocked Toymann will want to enjoy his night of lujuria if the Mormon wins, as I will if Obama gets it. Best to have all clear before its too late. I wouldn't want the often blocked Toymann to call me a cheapskate if I don't give a sufficient amount to Jackson (should I lose the bet).
Going back six pages on the Madaho's thread I finally found a post by ThugStar84; (http://www.argentinaprivate.com/forum/showthread.php?1908-Madahos&p=426111&viewfull=1#post426111):
"I ended up taking out a cute smaller peruvian girl (my hotel) that spoke a bit of english. For about an hour, she quoted 1100 (basically everything I had) + cab ride. I had the condoms already. So overall, I paid 1100 p (girl) + 80 p (cab, both ways, normally 25p on meter each way) , + 200 p (entry fee) + 400 p (1 Chica drink) = 1780 p! Or about 350 USD."
So it looks like my estimate of $200 or $250 was on the low side. I wouldn't want to destroy the often blocked Toymann's fishing budget, so maybe a $300 amount would be fair. If that figure is still too low, I will of course agree to $350 or $400. I am a standup guy and don't try to wiggle out of my commitments. Open for comments until its too late. I have noticed a silence from the usually blocked Toymann (checking the forum without logging in), I'm sure he wouldn't want any legitimacy he still might have on the forum to be annihilated by showing himself to be a Four Flusher who doesn't pay his bets (in the event that he loses).
Any bet with david33 is only a fantasy in his and some others mind. Have never heard directly from him thus no bet. Just wierd innuendo from some other posters. Black shirt is just having fun, he is from Nebraska so what can you expect! LOL. Soon all will be revealed. Monger on Dick! ToymannI just read this post by the wiggly and often blocked Toymann. Why should I have to contact him directly? I accepted his bet (which was posted on the forum), ON THE FORUM. and forum members reading back on this thread can clearly see that. I would hope that he will put his money where his mouth is or be seen for not only being a loud mouthed, unpleasant and insulting braggart, but also a scumbag, liar, muerto de hambre and cheat.
Member #2041
11-06-12, 13:47
Come Wednesday morning. 7 November 2012, if Mitt Romney wins you will hear an immediate hue & cry from the liberals that the election was stolen from Obama by those dirty Republicans using voter suppression to deny the will of the American people.
Have you noticed the Democrats have been pretty quiet about Obama winning lately?That's because I stopped posting here. In point of fact, the prediction markets, which I trust far more than polls, all of which have biases and methodological issues, have gone from nearly 50/50 to 72/28 pro Obama in the past week and a half.
www.intrade.com
Member #2041
11-06-12, 13:56
Wow! These polls are hard to take seriously.
CNN is at it again. CNN polled 41% Democrats 30% Republicans and 29% Independents. The result. A 49-49 tie. The 41-30 Democrat / Republican breakdown in laughable. The poll was a tie because the independents favored romney 59-37 (I guess 4% of Independents are still undecided)
The final 49-49 result may be somewhat close to the final result but the poll is fatally flawed with the 41-30 Democrat / Republican breakdown. If the election day breakdown is really 41-30 I doubt Republicans would win more than 100 House seats.
Anyway, the CNN poll is in line with Rasmussen and Gallup but the CNN polling method was absurd. If CNN actually arrived at a 49-49 tie with a 41-30 Dem / Rep participation and a 59-37 edge for Romney with Independents we are looking at a Romney landslide tomorrow.
Obama and romney may get A pluses for their campaigns but the polls get a F minus.Obviously, you don't know jack shit about polling methodology. When a sample has incorrect proportions of pro one side vs. the other, the raw numbers are adjusted to correct that disproportion out. It's called correcting for sampling bias. Pretty clearly, the raw numbers reflected a significant Obama edge that was corrected out by adjusting for the 41-30 Dem / Rep sample bias to get a final result of 49/49.
Basically, the way this is done is by re-weighting the sample toward whatever their methodology tells them that the TRUE Dem/Rep/Independent breakdown of likely voters will be, and then adjusting the weights assigned to the different groups that they actually sampled to correct for this bias.
In this way, you can actually draw an appropriate estimate even from a sample group that is widely disproportionate to the TRUE population of voters - as long as an adequate sample size was polled from each of the three groups, and they have done their homework correctly on the breakdown of likely voters by group. This latter issue is actually the one that separates the men from the boys amongst pollsters, and it's why Rassmussen's methodology in particular has come under fire in the past few years - because they don't poll folks who don't have land lines, they haven't been able to correctly adjust out their sampling bias. But HAVING a sampling bias - which ALL polls generally do - is not a major issue, if the polling organization knows that they have one, and can properly characterize it, they can and do adjust it out of the raw numbers. Correctly doing this adjustment, and understanding your sampling bias with respect to the true voting population is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE ASSOCIATED WITH POLLING ACCURACY.
I just read this post by the wiggly and often blocked Toymann. Why should I have to contact him directly? I accepted his bet (which was posted on the forum), ON THE FORUM. and forum members reading back on this thread can clearly see that. I would hope that he will put his money where his mouth is or be seen for not only being a loud mouthed, unpleasant and insulting braggart, but also a scumbag, liar, muerto de hambre and cheat.David, If you're right about this, I want to revisit an issue I had with Exon sometime back. By the same logic he needs to perform fellatio in front of the obelisk at high noon to follow up on a commitment he made here about me. You and Toymann never came to terms. His only bet was with Esten. I offered to take Obama and Toymann said no and that was that.
You and Toymann never came to terms.I realize you are one of the few forum members who supports the now revealed to be a cheapskate, cheater, liar and scumbag Toymann but you might want to clarify what "coming to terms" means. I accepted his bet put forward on the forum, long ago ON THE FORUM after he began to post insults referring to me for no apparent reason. He never said; bet's off, forget it or anything else which would suggest that my acceptance of HIS BET wasn't going to be honored. If it was looking like the guy Toymann has been supporting forever was going to win, I have no doubt he would be licking his lips waiting for me to give Jackson the money.
He has been one of the least popular forum members for a long time, and now that he is showing himself to be a liar (where is all that money he is always bragging about? He can't pay his bets?), I'm sure only you and a couple of others who have been treated to a beer now and then when he has actually had money in his pocket will continue to have anything to do with him. After all the damage he has done to the forum by his posts which personally insult other members causing many to leave AP, and now that he has also shown himself to be dishonest; I suggest he be banned.
Member #2041.
Sorry to ruin your day. Maybe you would like the pollsters to make corrections for the ratio of democratic to republican voters in a poll. But polls almost never do that and the CNN poll absolutely did not make that correction.
The 2008 presidential election had a 39-32-29 democratic / republican / independent breakdown. Almost all polls this year mirror the 2008 breakdown or have the breakdown even more skewed toward democrats. That is why most polls in 2012 favor Obama.
Gallup says the breakdown this election should be +1 Republican which will invalidate almost all polls taken in 2012.
But getting back to your idea that the CNN poll somehow adjusted for the large percentage of Democrats in their poll. That is a fantasy.
By the way, there is a reason Republicans are underepresented in most polls. Republicans, for one reason or another, are less likely to participate in polls. Consequently, most polls underestimate the Republican vote by up to one per cent. This is probably just what you, member 2041, wanted to hear.
I realize you are one of the few forum members who supports...Toymann but you might want to clarify what "coming to terms" means.I admit Toymann would be wise to tone it down sometimes. About "coming to terms", you appear to be involved in a one-sided negotiation below. How much a night at Madaho's should cost, how you're going to settle the bet, how you want to settle it without meeting him, etc.
You'd have to post links to the posts you and Toymann allegedly made before what you're saying could make sense to me. As best as I can remember, one of the attractions of the bet to Toymann was spending an evening with Esten, some sort of a misguided attempt to prove that a Democrat and Republican can participate in a night of debauchery without tearing each others throats out. Kind of like that Michael Jackson classic tune Ebony and Ivory, applied to politics. It didn't work out that way because of scheduling conflicts though.
About "coming to terms", you appear to be involved in a one-sided negotiation below. How much a night at Madaho's should cost, how you're going to settle the bet, how you want to settle it without meeting him, etc. You'd have to post links to the posts before what you're saying could make sense to me.I have no need to make any sense to you. Read back on the forum and you will see how Toymann out of nowhere began to insult me whenever I pointed out the dangers in electing a Mormon as President. He then put up his bet on the forum. I accepted on the forum. WHY would I want to have anything to do personally with someone who was dedicated to insulting me personally? This is why I proposed giving the money to Jackson. If Obama wins and Toymann tries to worm out of paying the bet, he will show himself to be completely despicable. Those who know me know that I will pay the bet if the Mormon wins. I keep my promises. This is why I am respected on the forums and continue to help more ISG members in one week than the worthless Toymann has in his entire life.
Member #2041
11-06-12, 15:33
Member #2041.
Sorry to ruin your day. Maybe you would like the pollsters to make corrections for the ratio of democratic to republican voters in a poll. But polls almost never do that and the CNN poll absolutely did not make that correction.
The 2008 presidential election had a 39-32-29 democratic / republican / independent breakdown. Almost all polls this year mirror the 2008 breakdown or have the breakdown even more skewed toward democrats. That is why most polls in 2012 favor Obama.
Gallup says the breakdown this election should be +1 Republican which will invalidate almost all polls taken in 2012.
But getting back to your idea that the CNN poll somehow adjusted for the large percentage of Democrats in their poll. That is a fantasy.
By the way, there is a reason Republicans are underepresented in most polls. Republicans, for one reason or another, are less likely to participate in polls. Consequently, most polls underestimate the Republican vote by up to one per cent. This is probably just what you, member 2041, wanted to hear.El Alamo, you proving again that you haven't a clue how polling is done is HARDLY ruining my day. BTW, I used to design these polling methodologies for a living. I do, however, expect that YOUR day is going to be ruined tomorrow. The simple fact is EVERY polling organization corrects for their sampling bias. The question is, how well and accurately they do it.
Member #3320
11-06-12, 15:35
Today's election is merely a choice of who is going to captain the sinking Titanic.
Daddy Rulz
11-06-12, 17:25
One night at Madaho.
Minimum;
180 to get in.
400 chica drink.
1000 for a decent chica for a decent multi hour session (winning a bet shouldn't net you a crappy hour and you shouldn't have to work super hard to close)
150 telo fee (it's a fucking bet, spring for the telo)
One night at Madaho=1730 pesos at whatever exchange pesos are going for when paid.
This should be the last word on this subject, but it won't be.
You may now return to whatever other stupid shit you want to argue about but this matter is settled.
I have no need to make any sense to you. Read back on the forum and you will see how Toymann out of nowhere began to insult me whenever I pointed out the dangers in electing a Mormon as President. He then put up his bet on the forum. I accepted on the forum. WHY would I want to have anything to do personally with someone who was dedicated to insulting me personally? This is why I proposed giving the money to Jackson. If Obama wins and Toymann tries to worm out of paying the bet, he will show himself to be completely despicable. Those who know me know that I will pay the bet if the Mormon wins. I keep my promises. This is why I am respected on the forums and continue to help more ISG members in one week than the worthless Toymann has in his entire life.OK, I did read back on the forum. On 1/6/2012 Toymann wrote 'Any interest in a Madahos wager Chezz or David? Your liberal brother Esten has crawled back under his rock to protect himself from the oncoming GOP tsunami. '
Toymann didn't describe the possible wager. It could have been for a drink at Madahos, poontang, who knows what. All he did was ask if there was any INTEREST in a wager. Over a month later, on 2/24/2012, you say you're 'taking' Toymann's bet, and in the same post you say you got Jackson to 'block' him. So how are you going to establish what the bet is and get him to accept it if you're not going to communicate with him? The next time you mention the 'bet' is on 9/24/2012 when you mention you're going to collect on this still undefined wager. At that time it seems to have morphed in your mind into a cash bet that has nothing to do with Madahos.
I still don't get it.
Agreed, you are respected on the forums and help more ISG members in a week than many of us do in a lifetime.
OK, I did read back on the forum. On 1/6/2012 Toymann wrote 'Any interest in a Madahos wager Chezz or David?I didn't take the bet because I don't gamble on things where I cannot affect the outcome. In California, state propositions and municipal measures are the only thing I'm even remotely interested in. Measure B in LA, for example, is an amusing ballot measure that all members of this board should be able to agree on.
Regarding today's big prize, I couldn't give a shit either way. Nothing REALLY is going to change no matter who gets the brass ring. This country is NOT a sinking Titanic, not compared to countries that measure "fucked-up" using a completely different metric. An old friend of mine from my days living in Russia published a piece in Rolling Stone that really hits the nail on the head. If you'll allow me to post the link, I think it's an interesting read:
http://m.rollingstone.com/entry/view/id/33205/pn/all/p/0/?KSID=7515d4e1423155c12d2c856592c27988
My favorite paragraph being "What's become clear in the last few weeks is that the last real taboo in America is admitting that the world isn't going to end if the other guy gets elected. The corollary to that taboo is an apparent new national prohibition against having even the slightest faith in the essential patriotism of the other side."
So, go ahead and believe that Obama is a foreign-born Communist / Marxist / Socialist hell bent on redistributing wealth and destroying the country because he's inherently evil / stupid. And on the other side, Romney is a magic-underwear-wearing religious nut / flip-flopping / ladder-climbing / corporate raider who only cares about the rich. Neither narrative is true. And really, who gives a shit? Nothing much will change, no matter which way you vote.
Daddy Rulz
11-06-12, 19:47
http://www.myfoxphilly.com/story/20019163/philly-da-probes-reported-voting-inspector-issues
O you say you got Jackson to 'block' him.Nope, Jackson blocked him on his own. I have never blocked anyone. During this time, I mentioned that if Toymann still had any friends, for them to give him a head's up that I was taking the bet. I'm sure he knew about it. The bet was for an evening at Madahos. Its incredible that he is trying to wiggle out of it, especially since one of his favorite topics is how much money he has. He's just one of those guys who won't put his money where his mouth is. Since you read back you saw how out of nowhere he began to attack me with personal insults. His bullying has caused many new forum members to leave. I won't be bullied by anyone, especially an idiot like Toymann, and answered his personal attacks with tranquility and without dropping to his level. If I am now using adjectives to describe this specimen, its because he is an embarrasment to AP and men in general. Now that he has shown himself to be a completely dishonest individual, one can only imagine how he managed to obtain whatever money he might actually have. Hopefully he will crawl away from AP with his tail between his legs and disappear forever. Now I'm going to go watch Fox News and enjoy myself.
By the way Tiny12, thanks for the acknowledgement.
You would think so. But despite the fact that billions of dollars are being spent on presidential elections, we do not place enough importance on election day to declare it a national holiday. So business as usual, dropping your infants at day care, opening your shop, delivering goods or services, another mundane day. In the end, what's so vital, is to keep the cash registers humming.
At one time, if you were to try to shop on Sunday, you would have found 90% of retail businesses closed. Perhaps, the supermarket, gas station, doughnut shop and humburger joint were open. I remember feeling urban isolation walking down Brand Blvd in Glendale with hardly a car in sight and every business closed. Nowadays, you find fights breaking out over a parking space at the mall so they could donate their hard earned cash. Ah, the new Temple where we can pray at the altar. Without knowing and realizing, you and I have been seduced into nothing but a being a compliant slave of Big Business. You have to work or no/expensive health insurance, right? You can't go to work unless you have car, right? Why was illegal immigration allowed to develop full-fledged symptoms. Now, do you know who owns Pepsi Cola or NBC? So who do you think holds the power? Obama or Romney?
Now, I do not claim to have any answers. But you just have to be savvy enough to play the game the best you can to your advantage. So what helps to survive: good family enviroment, education, and knowing when you are wrong (ahh, the most difficult). You start life without them, and it's uphill all the way. But I guess it has always been this way since the beginning of time.
Today's election is merely a choice of who is going to captain the sinking Titanic.There is still plenty of ballast in the sinking Titanic, fortunately. It's the crew and passengers mad rush to get to the railings that I am concern about. That is where the casualties are.
There is still plenty of ballast in the sinking Titanic, fortunately. It's the crew and passengers mad rush to get to the railings that I am concern about. That is where the casualties are.A $16 trillion national debt? $1 trillion+ budget deficits, being 7% to 10% of GDP, for the last four years? Unfunded medicare, medicaid and social security of >$50 trillion? And nobody gives a shit? It's more serious than you think. Nobody seems to have the will to deal with this. Actually Ryan does but he seems to have been muzzled, as apparently any politician willing to face facts can't get elected.
If I see a deserted island I'm jumping ship and swimming.
Member #3320
11-06-12, 21:58
A $16 trillion national debt? $1 trillion+ budget deficits, being 7% to 10% of GDP, for the last four years? Unfunded medicare, medicaid and social security of $50 trillion? And nobody gives a shit? It's more serious than you think. Nobody seems to have the will to deal with this. Actually Ryan does but he seems to have been muzzled, as apparently any politician willing to face facts can't get elected.
If I see a deserted island I'm jumping ship and swimming.The only thing registering any meaningful growth in the US is the national debt. It took over 200 years for the US government to accumulate its first trillion dollars in debt. It took just 286 days to accumulate the most recent trillion (from $15 trillion to $16 trillion).
Last month alone, the first full month of Fiscal Year 2013, the US government accumulated nearly $200 billion in new debt– 20% of the way to a fresh trillion in just 31 days.
The US government is legally bound to spend more money on mandatory entitlements and interest than it can raise in tax revenue. It won't make a difference how high they raise taxes, or even if they cut everything else that remains in government as we know it.
This is not a political problem, it's a mathematical one. Facts are facts, no matter how uncomfortable they may be.
If this is not a sinking Titanic, then what is? And the only question remains really is who will "Captain" it as it goes down slowly but surely.
OK, I did read back on the forum. On 1/6/2012 Toymann wrote 'Any interest in a Madahos wager Chezz or David? Your liberal brother Esten has crawled back under his rock to protect himself from the oncoming GOP tsunami. '
Toymann didn't describe the possible wager. It could have been for a drink at Madahos, poontang, who knows what. All he did was ask if there was any INTEREST in a wager. Over a month later, on 2/24/2012, you say you're 'taking' Toymann's bet, and in the same post you say you got Jackson to 'block' him. So how are you going to establish what the bet is and get him to accept it if you're not going to communicate with him? The next time you mention the 'bet' is on 9/24/2012 when you mention you're going to collect on this still undefined wager. At that time it seems to have morphed in your mind into a cash bet that has nothing to do with Madahos.
I still don't get it.
Agreed, you are respected on the forums and help more ISG members in a week than many of us do in a lifetime.After reading the spew from david33 you understand how an idiot like this thinks. And I am the abusive guy? LMAO. You summary of the facts is spot on. No bet has ever existed between myself and David33. I also thought it was funny how he went totally black for almost 6 months and then suddenly appeared this past summer when Romney was trailing. Like most half Witt's David33 doesn't let the facts get in the way. I wouldn't stop to piss on this clown if he was on fire standing right in front of me. IALOTFLMAO! Monger on TinyDude and kiss my ass David33. Toymann
WorldTravel69
11-06-12, 22:30
I wonder what party did this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maL8YMPDAo0
A $16 trillion national debt? $1 trillion+ budget deficits, being 7% to 10% of GDP, for the last four years? Unfunded medicare, medicaid and social security of $50 trillion? And nobody gives a shit? It's more serious than you think. Nobody seems to have the will to deal with this. Actually Ryan does but he seems to have been muzzled, as apparently any politician willing to face facts can't get elected.
If I see a deserted island I'm jumping ship and swimming.But, I guess I can learn fast enough to churn my arms & legs. So this is what America will do.
Big Boss Man
11-06-12, 23:38
4 precincts in one location and maybe about 6 voters. Romney will carry popular vote for sure if California voters are staying away from the polls.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 00:38
I wonder what party did this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maL8YMPDAo0The only verifiable cases of actual voting machines doing that were going the other way, switching Romney votes to Oloser.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 00:41
Or so it seems. However, the Panhandle has to deliver for Romney.
I am sure that if Romney wins the popular vote and loses the electoral vote, all the Libtards screaming about it in the past will now be on Romney's side.
Big Boss Man
11-07-12, 00:49
Wisconsin surprised me. I really thought Romney would win after recent events with Ryan on the ticket. And wrong about my out of consensus call in New Jersey. So much for my election prognostication skills.
Looks to me if Obama wins Ohio but not Florida he needs to win either IA or WI, as well as Colorado. If he wins Florida but not Ohio, then he has a few more ways to win. A lot of people were saying he might win AZ because the latinos are pissed off about the border shit, but that does not appear to be happening.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 01:42
No way Oloser wins AZ.
They just called AZ for Romnesia. I am surprised VA and NC are so close. IA I think reports from east to west and Des Moines is heavily Dem so that one is hard to judge so far.
Punter 127
11-07-12, 02:16
Fox just called Ohio for Obama, it's over.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:17
Fox just called Ohio for Obama, it's over.Fox just called Obama the Re-elected President
The stock futures market is not trending per who looks like they are winning but on the possibility the outcome will be unknown by the time the exchanges open. Interesting. And one source has given Wisconsin to Obama and the other one I am looking at has not.
Punter 127
11-07-12, 02:20
The stock futures market is not trending per who looks like they are winning but on the possibility the outcome will be unknown by the time the exchanges open. Interesting. And one source has given Wisconsin to Obama and the other one I am looking at has not.Dude it's over Obama wins.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:24
Dude it's over Obama wins.Shouldn't someone do a well-being check on El Alamo?
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:25
It is proof positive that the unproductive portion of the population has taken over and the rest of us are enslaved. The American voter is pretty gullible. It is truly sad that people fortunate enough to live here don't think that the legacy of America is worth passing down to the next generation.
I can only hope for intense and prolonged gridlock, up to and through the impeachment.
I guess we are now more like Argentina in that we are closer to Europe than we are the Americas.
I guess someone is still in denial.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:34
I will always believe in the greatness of America and that for which it used to stand. However, I now believe that nearly half of American voters don't believe in that same America. I am so disgusted and so disappointed with my fellow Americans.
As I go forward, I will be extremely guarded and will do everything in my power to protect myself from this out of control govt and the greed and selfishness of my fellow Americans.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:35
I guess someone is still in denial.I guess you aren't old enough to remember 2000. I'll never concede, regardless of what my candidate may do.
Msn is still not calling it, for some reason. And in my state, WEED is in the LEAD so the Libertarians can be happy about that. If indeed Obama has won, I hope he ends up with a popular vote majority too. It is bad juju otherwise. We need to get rid of the electoral college, but of course can't and won't.
The thing I noticed about this election is that as it grew closer, the Dems I knew became more convinced Obama would lose and the Republicans I knew became more convinced he would win. I myself had been feeling in my gut for the last four or five days that he would lose. That last batch of economic data was, while blah, not negative and I sort of think that could have been the difference.
Now on to the Senate race. Indiana was lost to the Republicans due to hoof in mouth disease. Where are we in Missouri?
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:36
I will always believe in the greatness of America and that for which it used to stand. However, I now believe that nearly half of American voters don't believe in that same America. I am so disgusted and so disappointed with my fellow Americans.
As I go forward, I will be extremely guarded and will do everything in my power to protect myself from this out of control govt and the greed and selfishness of my fellow Americans.You know, one of the things that you COULD do, is leave the country and renounce your citizenship. That will show us unproductive Americans that don't share your vision.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:40
Msn is still not calling it, for some reason. And in my state, WEED is in the LEAD so the Libertarians can be happy about that. If indeed Obama has won, I hope he ends up with a popular vote majority too. It is bad juju otherwise. We need to get rid of the electoral college, but of course can't and won't.
The thing I noticed about this election is that as it grew closer, the Dems I knew became more convinced Obama would lose and the Republicans I knew became more convinced he would win. I myself had been feeling in my gut for the last four or five days that he would lose. That last batch of economic data was, while blah, not negative and I sort of think that could have been the difference.
Now on to the Senate race. Indiana was lost to the Republicans due to hoof in mouth disease. Where are we in Missouri?The only thing that matters is that the Republicans retained the House and must stiffen their spines to impeach Obama (if and when a preponderance of evidence supports it, as the Benghazi investigations unfold) and to obstruct every dime of spending that isn't related to national security. Scorched earth.
TejanoLibre
11-07-12, 02:41
Dude it's over Obama wins.So maybe I can return? Why would I want to do so? Yes, he is more liberal and more likely to give me a Presidential Pardon but why would I want to return?
Let's see. 20 years in Club Fed or stay in BA?
Damn, I'm still thinking about it!
TL.
I feel sorry for the Boys that have to live in Sex Prison.
Good Luck, you may need it!
Punter 127
11-07-12, 02:41
The Senate will be controlled by the Democrats and the House by the Republicans, so it looks like four more years of nothing. IMHO the American people just made a huge mistake but it's not the first time.
Some people are disputing the Ohio call but I'm not sure Romney will even carry Florida.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:42
Msn is still not calling it, for some reason. And in my state, WEED is in the LEAD so the Libertarians can be happy about that. If indeed Obama has won, I hope he ends up with a popular vote majority too. It is bad juju otherwise. We need to get rid of the electoral college, but of course can't and won't.
The thing I noticed about this election is that as it grew closer, the Dems I knew became more convinced Obama would lose and the Republicans I knew became more convinced he would win. I myself had been feeling in my gut for the last four or five days that he would lose. That last batch of economic data was, while blah, not negative and I sort of think that could have been the difference.
Now on to the Senate race. Indiana was lost to the Republicans due to hoof in mouth disease. Where are we in Missouri?Actually, I became convinced Obama would win post Hurricane. I was following the prediction markets and the polling very closely. With the knowledge of someone who understands these polls from a technical perspective, as I used to design market research and polling methodologies professionally a couple of decades ago. It was clear that Romney lost his momentum during and immediately after the storm. Combined with the last debate. The aggregation of all the polls together were all telling the exact same story. By the Sunday Morning talk shows, even the more objective of the Republican talking heads were acknowledging that Romney / Ryan would lose.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:43
So maybe I can return? Why would I want to do so? Yes, he is more liberal and more likely to give me a Presidential PardonNo doubt that's really high on Obama's 2nd term to-do list.
You know, one of the things that you COULD do, is leave the country and renounce your citizenship. That will show us unproductive Americans that don't share your vision.Good idea. Speaking of unproductive Americans when was the last time you worked? 2005?
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:45
You know, one of the things that you COULD do, is leave the country and renounce your citizenship. That will show us unproductive Americans that don't share your vision.I need to stay here and support you leaches since your lacking education limited your reading comprehension skills.
I would never renounce my country. I am however, drastically changing my corporate outlook. I was looking at adding thousands of employees over the next several years. I have a 'plan B' in which I will put the onus on others to deal with the head count. I will make less but, I won't have to accept the unquantifiable cost of new hires. I am not alone in that line of thinking and you will see that the economy is stagnant, at best, and without a reduction in government / regulatory risk, that won't change.
The newspaper has called a victory for WEED in my state. I am already entitled but I am going to smoke to that anyway. To my Republican and or conservative and or Libertarian friends, you are going to pick up seats in the House so you can hope for some possibly maybe more conservative (or less insane) budgeting practices. It could be a good four years because I don't think too much will get done and I think the worldwide economy is in a modest recovery. There is nothing wrong with a modest recovery.
I mean, some kind of Armageddon could happen but I choose not to live thinking that way. I can see some technological advancements over the next four years and the Republican House won't let the Democrats go too far with their socialist leanings. Meanwhile, and importantly, I think other countries' regimes will fuck up worse in the years to come, maintaining the dollar as a safe haven. So let's hope for a moderate fiscal contraction instead of the sudden one we might have had if Romney had won, but yes it is imperative we contract. Maybe, just maybe, a Republican House and a Democratic president could do this.
Maybe.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 02:48
Actually, I became convinced Obama would win post Hurricane. I was following the prediction markets and the polling very closely. With the knowledge of someone who understands these polls from a technical perspective, as I used to design market research and polling methodologies professionally a couple of decades ago. It was clear that Romney lost his momentum during and immediately after the storm. Combined with the last debate. The aggregation of all the polls together were all telling the exact same story. By the Sunday Morning talk shows, even the more objective of the Republican talking heads were acknowledging that Romney / Ryan would lose.I'm not sure about the impact of the hurricane on the election due in large part to the fact that I am in the middle of the hurricane zone and the election has been off the radar for most around here since before the storm. The one thing I do know is that just as GWB directed Katrina to his New Orleans and its minority population, Obama directed Sandy to hit the tri-state region and all the rich white bankers and white-collar folks.
TejanoLibre
11-07-12, 02:50
No doubt that's really high on Obama's 2nd term to-do list.With Bush I was a Shoe-In, my neighbor and friends with his mother plus the Attorney General was a Latino; but alas, nobody wanted to get involved in my case. Just the best attorney, well, the best paid attorney.
COCKSUCKERS!
Shit, I need to send a thank You note for sending me to a country that is custom-made for TL!
Take care,
TL
Member #2041
11-07-12, 02:52
Good idea. Speaking of unproductive Americans when was the last time you worked? 2005?I have continued to do consulting part time since I retired in late 2005. I still make $50-80K per year working an average of 10-15 hours a week since I retired. Nonetheless, what I am most pleased about is that, when Obamacare fully kicks in in the beginning of 2014, my healthcare costs will be cut in half (I'm a Type II Diabetic) and I expect my insurance to go from nearly $800 / month to somewhere between $400-500 a month with far better coverage and smaller deductibles. BTW, why should I work more than that, when I have an investment portfolio in the seven figures, and already own both my own home and a vacation home in Cabo outright?
BTW, CBS just released the results of their exit polling on the economy, that voters nationally only gave Romney a 1% edge on ability to manage the economy 49-48, with Romney losing on just about EVERY other issue that voters considered to be important.
Member #3320
11-07-12, 02:56
Thank God Obama is back for another 4 years. God bless America for making the right choice.
Wild Walleye
11-07-12, 03:00
I have continued to do consulting part time since I retired in late 2005. I still make $50-80K per year working an average of 10-15 hours a week since I retired. Nonetheless, what I am most pleased about is that, when Obamacare fully kicks in in the beginning of 2014, my healthcare costs will be cut in half (I'm a Type II Diabetic, and I expect my insurance to go from nearly $800 / month to somewhere between $400-500 a month with far better coverage and smaller deductibles.
BTW, CBS just released the results of their exit polling on the economy, that voters nationally only gave Romney a 1% edge on ability to manage the economy 49-48, with Romney losing on just about EVERY other issue that voters considered to be important.Good luck with your fantasy about Obamacare and reduced costs. I (honestly) hope that you will never fall victim to rationing, since for folks with your condition it often translates into something much more significant than inconvenient timing. Don't forget, with Obamacare, you have absolutely no (repeat "no") coverage the moment you set foot on foreign soil. Unless you want to be a burden on others, you'll need to pick up supplemental insurance as well as evacuation insurance, which will definitely eat into your perceived savings.
However, let's look at this from a wider perspective, you are willing to contribute to the destruction of the Founders' vision for $300-400 / month. That says a lot about you.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 03:09
Good luck with your fantasy about Obamacare and reduced costs. I (honestly) hope that you will never fall victim to rationing, since for folks with your condition it often translates into something much more significant than inconvenient timing. Don't forget, with Obamacare, you have absolutely no (repeat "no") coverage the moment you set foot on foreign soil. Unless you want to be a burden on others, you'll need to pick up supplemental insurance as well as evacuation insurance, which will definitely eat into your perceived savings.
However, let's look at this from a wider perspective, you are willing to contribute to the destruction of the Founders' vision for $300-400 / month. That says a lot about you.Actually, I have coverage on foreign soil because I have dollars, and I can afford the out-of pocket cash costs in most countries OTHER than the USA. And the fact is, PRIOR to Obamacare, in 2007 I got dropped from a plan where I was paying $240 per month, when my COBRA expired, and forced to go to a HIPAA plan where my costs jumped immediately to $550 per month (now increased to $735) for vastly inferior coverage. Under Obamacare, I am guaranteed the right to be able to buy similar coverage to that which I was dropped in 2007. It will cost more than it did in 2007, but prior to Obamacare, insurance costs were already increasing at close to 15% annually.
And frankly, the Founders said that in their vision, I had an inalienable right to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Surely, in the 21st century, that also encompasses the right to have access to purchase healthcare insurance at the same market prices as you, irrespective of my employment situation - as I WAS insured when I was diagnosed, and only was dropped because the employer I had worked for when I got that insurance went out of business.
Regarding productive Americans, weren't all you Republicans and Republicans masquerading themselves as Libertarians screaming about how capital should be untaxed or taxed at preferential rates or whatever? Just because I am not dumb enough to work after I don't need to, doesn't make me unproductive. It means I won. Now, instead of contributing my human capital to the capitalist leeches, I will contribute my surplus capital to the investment pool in exchange for a modest and humble rate of return. The system has worked for me throughout Republican and Democratic administrations alike.
Earn more than you spend and good things will happen. This is true regardless of what you believe 'good things' to be. And, this applies to governments as well. An Obama reined in by a Republican congress is not that bad of a deal. Similarly a Romney reined in by a Democratic senate would not have been the end of the world.
Sometimes the best political strategy is as enunciated by Ferdinand of Castille to the first méxican viceroy: Do little and do it slowly.
So if Obama wanted to reach out to the other side he should eliminate say three government agencies immediately. I would love to see him do that.
WorldTravel69
11-07-12, 03:15
It looks like most of You Red Necks only got what Romney wanted, Home Education.
How did that work out?
You and the Midwest and Southern people voted, just want they wanted the Southern 47%ers to vote, they are really the Non-Educated people in Our Country.
They are like the Marines. God bless Them. The Republicans want victims that have little brains and told what to Do, they need only pass to pass the 35% mentality test.
They do not want You that can think.
Because they can not control your mind.
Go Back to School!
Senility is a terrible thing.
WorldTravel69
11-07-12, 03:22
Which you Red Necks and Midwestern Noneducational People Need.
Home Education did not work, as Romney said it Would.
He Lied to You.
P.S.
Why is it that some people lose their minds when they are young, or are they misguided?
Hitler was good at that.
The Donald has spoken.
"We should have a revolution in this country!"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1112/83450.html?hp=r16
No doubt that's really high on Obama's 2nd term to-do list.But maybe, it was an unpardonable act that he committed.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 03:30
Which you Red Necks and Midwestern Noneducational People Need.
Home Education did not work, as Romney said it Would.
He Lied to You.
P. S.
Why is it that some people lose their minds when they are young, or are they misguided?
Hitler was good at that.Not everyone has the aptitude to be educated. Some folks are congenitally stupid. For example, some posters here who were consistently in extreme denial as the late polling was clearly breaking toward Obama. I was even told by one of them that major polling organizations do not correct for their known sampling biases. It was all that I could do to control my laughter, as I have designed these sort of polling methodologies in a prior job and it happens to be my area of academic expertise. I won't name names, but anyone who reads the forum back 2 days will be able to figure it out.
Which you Red Necks and Midwestern Noneducational People Need.
Home Education did not work, as Romney said it Would.
He Lied to You.
P. S.
Why is it that some people lose their minds when they are young, or are they misguided?
Hitler was good at that.You are either drunk or dumber than a bag full of hammers.
http://news.msn.com/politics/election-day-2012-ballot-initiatives
Smoke it if you got it!
Member #2041
11-07-12, 04:15
The USA stock futures markets are now only very slightly in the negative (like -0.2%) and all the international stock exchanges are significantly in the positive, for those who were wondering what the rest of the world thought of this election.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/07/us/politics/obama-romney-presidential-election-2012.html?_r=0
Only in the make-believe world of fox news and the radical right wing is Obama a radical anything. George Bush, the younger, committed more class warfare and income redistribution than than Barack ever even imagined.
A decent & intellligent man, the victim Milt Romney was strangled by the Tea Party. No other wounds or marks found on body & limbs.
Just because I am not dumb enough to work after I don't need to, doesn't make me unproductive.Actually it does. I figured you were still working. If you and Member #2041 (who I directed that comment at) are not it's a waste, as you're both very intelligent and capable of accomplishing good things. Seriously, either that or you've got the wool pulled over my eyes. You'd probably need to get over your obsession with grammar and spelling before you could accomplish anything truly great though.
Earn more than you spend and good things will happen.
So if Obama wanted to reach out to the other side he should eliminate say three government agencies immediately. I would love to see him do that.That I agree wholeheartedly with.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 11:03
Actually it does. I figured you were still working. If you and Member #2041 (who I directed that comment at) are not it's a waste, as you're both very intelligent and capable of accomplishing good things. Seriously, either that or you've got the wool pulled over my eyes. You'd probably need to get over your obsession with grammar and spelling before you could accomplish anything truly great though.
That I agree wholeheartedly with.And I admit, there is very little that I could be doing in this world, that is LESS productive than attempting to educate the right wingers on this venue. Which is why, after I am done gloating in a day or two, I will cease to post here. But first, shouldn't someone do a well-being check on El Alamo, who, I fear, may have harmed himself as a result of this election, and who has not posted here ever since reality set in? He did, after all, attempt to show me that I didn't understand why Gallup and Rassmussen were the only pollsters who could be trusted on this Election. And I admit, I STILL don't understand why that is the case. But I appreciated the entertainment value of his claim, as I always enjoy a good joke, even if the person telling it believes that they are actually serious.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 11:44
A decent & intellligent man, the victim Milt Romney was strangled by the Tea Party. No other wounds or marks found on body & limbs.IMHO, the reason he lost was cognitive dissonance amongst the Right, and the attempt to create an alternate reality out of whole cloth:
Romney and the Republicans attempted to frame their opponent as a Kenyan Muslim Marxist, rather than what he was, which was a Black American of mixed descent who had actually successfully lived the American dream. In doing this, the rational center of the electorate was repelled by the ridiculousness of the Republican alternative.
Here's the facts: This nonsense, and the complete laughingstock that the Republican Party presented to the American Public during the primaries, actually ended up handing the race to Obama, despite the persistent 8% unemployment, despite the failure to make progress on the deficit, despite the inability to connect with his own progressive constituency, and despite Obama's inability to martial the public to support him in his battles with an intransigent Congress. By kowtowing to the lunatic fringe of the Republican religious zealots in the primaries, the birthers, loonies, and morons who are still out there demanding Obama's school transcripts, Romney insured that the ambivalent folks in the center would be horrified by the prospects of him winning.
The guy who was a pragmatic centrist Governor of Massachussetts, had he actually CONSISTENTLY run that way from the start, would have defeated Obama in the General Election WITH EASE. Heck, even I might have voted for him. Of course, that guy could never have gotten the nomination from what has become a genuinely scary Republican base with sensibilities right out of the 19th century with respect to race, gender, and social progress. It wasn't enough for Romney to be a reasonable guy for one night during the first debate - we all saw what he was saying during the primaries - about women, about Hispanics, about civil liberties, about Supreme Court niominees, and about unbalanced slashing and burning of the entire Social Security and Medicare programs, all while leaving Defense untouched, and biasing the financial costs of the nation's recovery on the back of the Middle class so that his wealthy benefactors avoided paying their share of the burden. And That Guy will NEVER win in the general election, even against about as weak a candidate from the other side as the Republicans could EVER hope to face, in as weak an economy as any incumbent has EVER run in and yet still emerged victorious.
By kowtowing to the lunatic fringe of the Republican religious zealots in the primaries, the birthers, loonies, and morons who are still out there demanding Obama's school transcripts, Romney insured that the ambivalent folks in the center would be horrified by the prospects of him winning.Bullshit.
They voted for the guy they thought was the most likely to give them free money.
Thanks,
Jackson
Member #2041
11-07-12, 11:55
Bullshit.
They voted for the guy they thought was the most likely to give them free money.
Thanks,
JacksonAs I said in my prior post. There is very little that I could do on this planet that is LESS productive an endeavor than attempting to educate the righties in this particular venue. Thanks for the existence proof.
As I said in my prior post. There is very little that I could do on this planet that is LESS productive an endeavor than attempting to educate the righties in this particular venue. Thanks for the existence proof.As I said in my entire life. There is very little that I could do on this planet that is LESS productive an endeavor than attempting to educate the lefties in any particular venue. Thanks for the existence proof.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 12:20
As I said in my entire life. There is very little that I could do on this planet that is LESS productive an endeavor than attempting to educate the lefties in any particular venue. Thanks for the existence proof.It's true. You are unable to educate those who are more enlightened than yourself. Gotta run - I think my point has been made.
But one last thing - Seriously, has anyone checked to see that El Alamo hasn't killed himself over the election results? I mean, it must be tough when an entire false reality that one has created around themselves comes crashing down from a head-on collision with the facts
kiss my ass David33.You have been shown up on the forum as a blowhard, a fake, a cheater and a scumbag (for the few who already didn't realize that). Many on the forum are afraid to face you because you will then begin to abuse them in your customary hysterical ungrammatical posts. I have called you out as a coward and a fake. I would have paid off the bet had your Mormon won. But that is the difference between you and me and why I am respected on the forums and you aren't. Too bad you don't have any self respect because then you would go away and AP would be better off. But since you obviously don't have a life without AP, I imagine you will linger on until Jackson hopefully decides that your negativity on the forum is not worth the few bucks he gets from renting you a room and bans you. The majority of AP forum members and myself will count the days until that happens. Until then, everytime you start to brag about how much money you are supposed to have, all will remember that you weasled out of a bet to avoid paying a measily $350. Those are the facts and you can keep whining and posting personal insults; talk is cheap but actions are what count. Everytime a forum member meets you he will remember you as the loser who welched on his bet.
Anyone who knows me personally is aware that $350 is no big deal for me. Its not about the dollars, its about PUTTING YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. This is why I took the bet. As far as I'm concerned showing up Toymann for what he really is (to anyone who didn't already know), is worth far more than $350.
The case is closed.
Member #4112
11-07-12, 12:41
I wish to congratulate the liberals / democrats and President Obama upon his reelection.
I find it disheartening to see those liberals / Democrats on the board are unable to be magnanimous in victory or conduct themselves with any sense of dignity or deportment upon their victory.
Good idea. Speaking of unproductive Americans when was the last time you worked? 2005?That comment shows why you are one of the few who defend Toymann."Insults are the last refuge of the out-argued".
That comment shows why you are one of the few who defend Toymann."Insults are the last refuge of the out-argued".It actually wasn't entirely an insult. Read my other post. I think Member #2041 is formidable and underutilized.
Actually it does. I figured you were still working. If you and Member #2041 (who I directed that comment at) are not it's a waste, as you're both very intelligent and capable of accomplishing good things. Seriously, either that or you've got the wool pulled over my eyes. You'd probably need to get over your obsession with grammar and spelling before you could accomplish anything truly great though.
That I agree wholeheartedly with.I am still working but not very much. I have accomplished what I set out to accomplish as far as work goes and am concentrating on other things. You are probably one of the many workaholics. Now THOSE people have the wool pulled over their eyes! One of the things I was told when I was training for the cushy government job I once had with the postal service,"Any idiot can carry a long route. I have reached a respectable retirement age and I have no heirs, so why take work away from someone else? It is just my little way of redistributing wealth. Regarding the agencies, how many Cabinet members are there now as compared to say fifty years ago? I would combine commerce and interior; and go back to when there was a single secretary of health, education, and welfare.
Remember now, we want to do this kind of slowly. We want to shoot for a nice long, moderate expansion. Cut the deficit by 5% this year and as the recovery strengthens, go for maybe 10%. Cutting the deficit by 20% in four years would be good progress. And don't go fuck with the good potheads of WA and CO because that would be a huge waste of resources.
I agree the Republicans could have won with a more moderate approach. I think two comments cost Romney the election: the 47% thing and telling students to borrow money from their parents. If we want to save some resources, I suggest that any student who does not get a 2.0 in his or her freshman year loses all financial aid. Let those fuckers go to work for a few years.
I wish to congratulate the liberals / democrats and President Obama upon his reelection.
I find it disheartening to see those liberals / Democrats on the board are unable to be magnanimous in victory or conduct themselves with any sense of dignity or deportment upon their victory.Sadly, this reaction should be expected brother. Bad losers also make bad winners. Congrats Esten, it was close but you were right. Pm me for your travel schedule next year. Happy mongering all. Toymann
He, He, He The "Mormon MotherFucking CockSucker" Lost.
Exon
Daddy Rulz
11-07-12, 13:46
I wish to congratulate the liberals / democrats and President Obama upon his reelection.
I find it disheartening to see those liberals / Democrats on the board are unable to be magnanimous in victory or conduct themselves with any sense of dignity or deportment upon their victory.Hey I'm not doing a happy dance. Though I'm more of a progressive / apathist than a liberal / democrat.
As far as Member 2041 you guys have been beating the crap out of him for months and he has taken on all comers. As Tiny12 said "Member #2041 is formidable" I think he's earned a victory lap, besides anybody who couldn't see he would gloat needs to get their glasses changed. His hunger for gloating is only eclipsed by his hunger for a certain something, something on Calle Paraguay.
I wish to congratulate the liberals / democrats and President Obama upon his reelection.
I find it disheartening to see those liberals / Democrats on the board are unable to be magnanimous in victory or conduct themselves with any sense of dignity or deportment upon their victory.Magnanimity best expressed by posting nothing at all....or almost nothing.
Fuck the presidential election. WEED WINS. And the fact it did so in two states and not just one means these fuckers are going to have to address the issue. Smoke it if you got it. And I got it. I think even El Jefe can get on board with this one.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 13:56
It actually wasn't entirely an insult. Read my other post. I think Member #2041 is formidable and underutilized.Perhaps, but what he is, is content with his life.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 14:03
Hey I'm not doing a happy dance. Though I'm more of a progressive / apathist than a liberal / democrat.
As far as Member 2041 you guys have been beating the crap out of him for months and he has taken on all comers. As Tiny12 said "Member #2041 is formidable" I think he's earned a victory lap, besides anybody who couldn't see he would gloat needs to get their glasses changed. His hunger for gloating is only eclipsed by his hunger for a certain something, something on Calle Paraguay.That being said, I have left you all with a gift. Although I seriously doubt that you will have the sense to recognize it as such (although one righty on this forum has already complimented me on it in a Private Message). My post #2090 in this thread genuinely represents my best advice to all of you. And it was offered without malice, or sarcasm, or the gloating that many of my other posts of the past day have contained. If the right wing here, and in the rest of the Republican party actually took it to heart, they could again become a viable, positive force in American politics. And even for me as a moderate Democratic-leaning person, I would appreciate that sort of a useful counterweight to the often overly entitlement-leaning orthodoxy of the Democratic Party. Just not one that panders to the Religious Right Zealotry that has come to dominate the Present-day Republican party.
The Right Wing has become marginalized by their unwillingness to deal in facts, and in science, and in objectivity. When they don't like objective reality, they disregard it, and create their own false reality, rather than actually dealing with the truth and crafting LEGITIMATE arguments that address the real world. And that is what Re-elected Barack Obama.
Daddy Rulz
11-07-12, 14:12
Fuck the presidential election. WEED WINS. And the fact it did so in two states and not just one means these fuckers are going to have to address the issue. Smoke it if you got it. And I got it. I think even El Jefe can get on board with this one.DH this is just for you
You are unable to educate those who are more enlightened than yourself.It's got nothing to do with "education" or "enlightenment".
You're selling dependency, but I'm interested in self-reliance and personal responsibility.
You're selling prejudice against those who work hard and succeed, but I'm interested in equal opportunity but not guaranteed outcome.
You're selling out of control borrowing and spending, but I'm interested in living within our fiscal means.
You're selling bigger government, but I'm interested in a smaller, less intrusive government.
And on and on and on...
Thanks,
Jackson
...has become marginalized by their unwillingness to deal in facts, and in science, and in objectivity. When they don't like objective reality, they disregard it, and create their own false reality, rather than actually dealing with the truth and crafting LEGITIMATE arguments that address the real world. And that is what Re-elected Barack Obama.WOW! That's EXACTLY how I see the Democrats!
Thank you, DR. Rest assured my apartment would appear similar from an aerial view right now. Regarding what #2041 said, if I got the number right, I wonder if the Republican party could split with the insane religious zealots going one way and the pragmatic supply siders maybe joining the Libertarians. If that happened, maybe some fiscally conservative Democrats would defect to the Libertarians. Right now I don't think the Libertarian party appeals to those Democrats because their plans for fiscal contraction are too extreme. I would consider it a good thing if a viable third party could emerge. Even if a third party could get 10% of the vote, it would result in more coalition building and consensus seeking, which I believe is what is needed right now. A frequent criticism of this kind of '10%' situation is that the third party then holds the other two hostage. I am sort of okay with that idea. The 10%ers put everybody else in a room and say now you fuckers work it out. The Libertarians could be that party, if they themselves moderate a bit. If they moderate too much then they will be viewed as sell-outs so it is a fine line to walk.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 14:23
WOW! That's EXACTLY how I see the Democrats!Which, as I said, is emblematic of the problem at hand, and why your side got it's ass handed to it yesterday.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 14:30
Thank you, DR. Rest assured my apartment would appear similar from an aerial view right now. Regarding what #2041 said, if I got the number right, I wonder if the Republican party could split with the insane religious zealots going one way and the pragmatic supply siders maybe joining the Libertarians. If that happened, maybe some fiscally conservative Democrats would defect to the Libertarians. Right now I don't think the Libertarian party appeals to those Democrats because their plans for fiscal contraction are too extreme. I would consider it a good thing if a viable third party could emerge. Even if a third party could get 10% of the vote, it would result in more coalition building and consensus seeking, which I believe is what is needed right now. A frequent criticism of this kind of '10%' situation is that the third party then holds the other two hostage. I am sort of okay with that idea. The 10%ers put everybody else in a room and say now you fuckers work it out. The Libertarians could be that party, if they themselves moderate a bit. If they moderate too much then they will be viewed as sell-outs so it is a fine line to walk.The other issue with Libertarianism is that, while they give lip-service to laissez-faire foreign policy, and real personal freedoms in individual beliefs and conduct, they don't really believe it in the fiber of their bones the way that they do about not being taxed by the government. If the tenets of Libertarianism that appeal to Democrats were hewn to as aggressively as the tenets that appeal to Republicans are, a significant portion of Democrats WOULD be attracted to it. But the Libertarian movement really DOESN'T give those tenets their true passion, the way that they do the anti-tax and anti-government message. If my right to live freely and equally as an Atheist were as aggressively defended as righties desire not to be taxed is defended, the movement would have some coherence and consistency. But it really does not, and is not fooling anyone.
People like me and Jackson want the same thing at the end of the day but have come to view each other as such polar opposites that we can look at the same set of conditions and circumstances and come to completely opposite conclusions. That is a fuck of a lot better situation than Stalin or Stroessner or even Plutarco Calles, where we would both have to come to someone else's conclusion or get shot. It is like Keynes and Hayek, fundamentally different starting points. Sometimes the US pisses me off but the political process here is better than in most places. We just had an election and last I heard out of a country of 310 million or whatever it is, the difference in the popular vote is 90, 000 or something like that, an amazingly small difference. Yet there will not be a revolution either way. That whole electoral college thing is bullshit but we will have to live with that.
Now I suggest both sides move to the center for the sake of sheer efficiency, because the extreme shit is not going to happen.
The other issue with Libertarianism is that, while they give lip-service to laissez-faire foreign policy, and real personal freedoms in individual beliefs and conduct, they don't really believe it in the fiber of their bones the way that they do about not being taxed by the government. If the tenets of Libertarianism that appeal to Democrats were hewn to as aggressively as the tenets that appeal to Republicans are, a significant portion of Democrats WOULD be attracted to it. But the Libertarian movement really DOESN'T give those tenets their true passion, the way that they do the anti-tax and anti-government message. If my right to live freely and equally as an Atheist were as aggressively defended as righties desire not to be taxed is defended, the movement would have some coherence and consistency. But it really does not, and is not fooling anyone.When I went to see Jim Gray, it is definitely the case that once the discussion moved from tax to health care and exactly how the whole money thing would work, he fuzzed out completely. The Libertarians need to do more economic research and put their numbers together in a way that can be taken seriously, and address health care in some coherent fashion even if it is to say fuck you, you are on your own. Gray flat out embarrassed himself there.
Fuck the presidential election. WEED WINS. And the fact it did so in two states and not just one means these fuckers are going to have to address the issue. Smoke it if you got it. And I got it. I think even El Jefe can get on board with this one.Here here, but worth noting that even under the guidance of the "communist" Obama, the Feds are not on board with this. But hey, one small step for man.
SnakeOilSales
11-07-12, 15:54
Bullshit.
They voted for the guy they thought was the most likely to give them free money.
Thanks,
JacksonWrong. The deciding votes were cast by working class white voters, women, and hispanics who were voting AGAINST Romney, much more so than FOR Obama. As I stated months ago, Romney was a terrible candidate and the Republicans signed their own death warrant in this election by nominating him. How can anyone with half a brain expect to win an election in the USA today when they take extreme hardline positions against these groups (Romney's anti abortion, anti immigrant, anti-auto bailout stances sank his ship). Many news commentators were speculating that the Republicans are finished as a catch all party because of changing demographics but I actually do not believe this. If the Republicans come up with a middle of the road candidate that doesn't take hardline social positions and doesn't have a history as a corporate raider they could very well win in 2016.
Member #2041
11-07-12, 16:08
People like me and Jackson want the same thing at the end of the day but have come to view each other as such polar opposites that we can look at the same set of conditions and circumstances and come to completely opposite conclusions. That is a fuck of a lot better situation than Stalin or Stroessner or even Plutarco Calles, where we would both have to come to someone else's conclusion or get shot. It is like Keynes and Hayek, fundamentally different starting points. Sometimes the US pisses me off but the political process here is better than in most places. We just had an election and last I heard out of a country of 310 million or whatever it is, the difference in the popular vote is 90, 000 or something like that, an amazingly small difference. Yet there will not be a revolution either way. That whole electoral college thing is bullshit but we will have to live with that.
Now I suggest both sides move to the center for the sake of sheer efficiency, because the extreme shit is not going to happen.The difference in the popular vote was more like 3 Million, once the West Coast returns came in. Obama had OVER 50% of the vote, and Romney had less than 48. 5% overall. It wasn't that close at the end of the day.
I think that because Republican economic policies are beneficial to less than 50% of the population, they had to reach out to fringe elements. Although it might be true that Democratic policies tend to be more beneficial to the lazy, that is just tells you that laziness is more popular than Bible spewing. It is also a lot more fun. So here's to the lazy, the shiftless, the takers, the underemployed and the unproductive by choice. Think how much more lazy and shiftless and unproductive we will be with all this weed floating around.
The difference in the popular vote was more like 3 Million, once the West Coast returns came in. Obama had OVER 50% of the vote, and Romney had less than 48. 5% overall. It wasn't that close at the end of the day.Regardless of who you favored, it is a good thing that the electoral winner carried the popular vote, and also that they got a majority and not just a plurality. If it had gone the other way I still would have wanted that to happen. But yeah, looking at the final results, nowhere near as close as I thought it would be. Virginia? Shocking.
Chicago Guy
11-07-12, 17:07
If only American college students were as smart as their Israeli counterparts:
http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/middle-east-north-africa/264609-romney-polls-far-ahead-of-obama-in-israel
It is proof positive that the unproductive portion of the population has taken over and the rest of us are enslaved.For reals? Enslaved? Keep looking at the world through those rose-colored glasses in your alternate universe, wherever that is. Go ahead and keep listening to your odious, hate–filled speak of radio hosts Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Glenn Beck. Keep closing that tent of yours. Together with the likes of Sarah Palin, Bachmann, Sununu, Bolton and the rest of the Looney-tune neocons: I hope you all had a great night's sleep last night.
The reality of what happened last night clearly was the end result of the extreme wing of the GOP hijacking the Republican Party. Witness the 'reasonable' Republicans like General Colin Powell and John Huntsman clearly distancing themselves.
Let's face it; the Republican Party has become the party of primarily; grumpy, older, white men who are dying a slow death. Sure, there is a sprinkling of Hispanics and other minorities but one has but just look at the broad face of Romney's supporters. There is very little diversity that one can tell. Quite similar to the vast array of female bleach-blond anchors of Fox News TV network.
Speaking of the Fox News on 2012 Election night coverage: It was absolutely delightful seeing Megyn Kelly and fellow anchor, Bret Baier slowly change their disposition, posture and facial expressions as the evening wore on.
And who can forget watching GOP pollster guru and strategist Carl Rove on Fox News last night sweating it out and desperately trying to recalculate and refute the odds and reality? Sorry, Mr. Rove, the ghosts of 2000 didn't show up in Ohio in this election.
Maybe one day, you'll recognize that those Independent voters are mainly intelligent moderates who can't stand your agenda.
Big Boss Man
11-07-12, 23:50
I voted for Obama but was on record of thinking that Romney would win. I thought with 7. 9% unemployment rate people would get in the poll booth and say it is just time for a change and vote for Romney.
I think Republicans underestimated Obama as an opponent. Sununu called Obama "lazy". Frequent calls for Obama to release his college transcripts meaning people thought they were inadequate. On my Facebook page and even here, people were calling Obama incompetent. Romney should have acted like a SEC football coach playing Nichols State."Nichols State presents a real challenge for us the week." Is "pride goeth before a fall" in the Bible? I haven't read one in awhile. The truth is that every contested state except possibly Florida, Obama won. You cannot believe your own bullshit as my Dad would say.
Romney needed to more transparent in my mind. He had a tax plan but would not show it to anybody. He remained a private banker instead of evolving into a a politician. One person I read described Romney's style as transactional. To his God and Family, he is a rock with unwavering principles but in business and politics, he is more of a deal maker.
As Borat would say..... High Five !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVRV0Nww8R4
Congrats to the Republicans also for a hard fought campaign. The Republican Party clearly pulled out all the stops, threw everything they could at Obama, but still came up short. That says a lot.
It was a broad win / gain for Obama and Democrats:
- Electoral College by 300+
- Popular Vote by 2%
- Pickup 2 seats in Senate
- Pickup 4 seats in House
Romney was a good candidate for the most part, and probably would have made a good president. I think he's more a practical centrist than a conservative, but he would have been compelled to lean right in his policies, and that was a big part of why he did not win. Republican positions on taxes and defense spending do not enjoy majority support.
The USA stock futures markets are now only very slightly in the negative (like -0.2%) and all the international stock exchanges are significantly in the positive, for those who were wondering what the rest of the world thought of this election.USA stock markets were down 2.4% on the day after the election. European markets were down around 1.4%. Commodities were weaker and interest rates were lower as the markets anticipate the possibility of another recession if the USA goes over the fiscal cliff. Comments from the president of the European Central Bank also played a part in the declines.
The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.
The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.The futures went up then they went back down. They were lower just before Draghi's comments hit the wires than when Obama was declared the winner. Given that most people thought Obama would win before Tuesday night (it was already priced in) and given that USA markets performed worse than European markets yesterday and also so far today, I believe the election results did have a negative effect on prices. Draghi's comments would have been more relevant to Europe, the election results more relevant to the U.S. I thought Obama would win, but now that I know he did, I'm selling stocks faster than I was before. There are other people like me.
The futures market went up after Obama was declared the winner, then down after the comments by the ECB. It's fact that both the stock market and the economy have historically performed better under Democratic administrations, as I demonstrated a week or so ago.Precisely.
Even FOX News Business agrees.
"History Shows Stocks, GDP Outperform Under Democrats"
- By Matt Egan.Published September 04, 2012.
Stock performance and big business (corporate) profits soared under the 1st term of the Obama Administration.
"History Shows Stocks...Outperform Under Democrats"Good, if you believe there are correlations between Democrat presidents and stock market performance that will repeat going forward then maybe you should buy shares from the poor misguided suckers who are selling, like me. There's no use arguing over it, profit from it.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 14:53
Good, if you believe there are correlations between Democrat presidents and stock market performance that will repeat going forward then maybe you should buy shares from the poor misguided suckers who are selling, like me. There's no use arguing over it, profit from it.The problem is, and the markets also finally realized, that we have pretty much the same jokers in Congress who created this fiscal cliff in the first place. That being said, I am hopeful that the Teabaggers have been chastened by the election results, and I certainly see some nuance in what Boehner has said since the election. But Boehner didn't cause the problem the first time, Eric Cantor did. But Cantor must have seen his state of Virginia go for Obama, and also the Democratic Senatorial and Gubernatorial candidates as well - although he himself was re-elected pretty easily.
What I actually expect will happen with respect to the fiscal cliff is that there will be a pretty quick deal to undo the cliff and pass a continuing resolution, but no substantive deal to really crack the deficit, with both revenue enhancement and major cuts - thus, Congress will again kick the can down the road. And unfortunately, other than using the bully pulpit hopefully more effectively than he did last time to leverage his just re-confirmed public support, Obama can't really do much about that, the ball is in Congress's court.
The problem is, and the markets also finally realized, that we have pretty much the same jokers in Congress who created this fiscal cliff in the first place. That being said, I am hopeful that the Teabaggers have been chastened by the election results, and I certainly see some nuance in what Boehner has said since the election.What about the joker in the White House? It takes two to tango. Like Obama, Tea Party members were re-elected so I don't know if they should be chastened. The best path would be if Obama could come off his politically popular "fuck the rich (i.e. small businesses) with higher tax rates" platform, which is only going to raise about $70 billion to fund a $1 trillion deficit, from what I've read. If Obama can abandon the higher tax rates and instead accept lower spending combined with a "fuck the rich with fewer write-offs and tax preferences" platform, there would likely be a solution, and we'd all be better for it. Except maybe the hedge fund managers, and the lazy bums Dickhead has referred to.
One possible plus about an Obama victory, maybe now that he's not trying to win re-election he'll be more likely to work with House Repubicans on solutions for the deficit and entitlements.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 15:26
What about the joker in the White House? It takes two to tango. Like Obama, Tea Party members were re-elected so I don't know if they should be chastened. The best path would be if Obama could come off his politically popular "fuck the rich (I. E. Small businesses) with higher tax rates" platform, which is only going to raise about $70 billion to fund a $1 trillion deficit, from what I've read. If Obama can abandon the higher tax rates and instead accept lower spending combined with a "fuck the rich with fewer write-offs and tax preferences" platform, there would likely be a solution, and we'd all be better for it. Except maybe the hedge fund managers, and the lazy bums Dickhead has referred to.
One possible plus about an Obama victory, maybe now that he's not trying to win re-election he'll be more likely to work with House Repubicans on solutions for the deficit and entitlements.Obama offered the deal that the exit polls say 60% of Americans support. It was the Tea partiers behind Cantor that bailed last time around, and forced Boehner to pull out of a deal he was pushing his delegation to accept.
Surely, you are not suggesting that a small minority of extremists should be holding a substantial majority of the American public hostage, are you? The election confirmed that the American people back Obama's approach. That's what we just voted on, and Obama was re-elected much more decisively than anyone on the Right had any idea that he would be (over 300 electoral votes, and a TRUE majority of the popular vote ~ 3 Million vote margin. Elections matter - and this Election clearly demonstrated that Obama's approach was approved by the voters.
The FACT is, Obama has ALWAYS moved toward the Republican position, and the Republican reaction has been to pull away, and reject their own previously stated positions rather than deal with him. That's what happened on Health Care, and it's what happened during the Debt ceiling negotiations in 2011, and Mitch McConnell is on record stating that's what he would do, and did do. The voters just told you who's position they backed in those issues.
And actually, in point of fact, several of the most extremist Tea-Partiers were NOT re-elected to the Congress.
SnakeOilSales
11-08-12, 15:29
What about the joker in the White House? It takes two to tango. Like Obama, Tea Party members were re-elected so I don't know if they should be chastened. The best path would be if Obama could come off his politically popular "fuck the rich (I. E. Small businesses) with higher tax rates" platform, which is only going to raise about $70 billion to fund a $1 trillion deficit, from what I've read. If Obama can abandon the higher tax rates and instead accept lower spending combined with a "fuck the rich with fewer write-offs and tax preferences" platform, there would likely be a solution, and we'd all be better for it. Except maybe the hedge fund managers, and the lazy bums Dickhead has referred to.
One possible plus about an Obama victory, maybe now that he's not trying to win re-election he'll be more likely to work with House Repubicans on solutions for the deficit and entitlements."The Rich" (taxpayers making over $250, 000 per year) are going to see their tax rates go up, plain and simple. Obama was re-elected with a mandate to raise taxes on "The Rich" and there is no way he is going to back away from this.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 15:42
"The Rich" (taxpayers making over $250, 000 per year) are going to see their tax rates go up, plain and simple. Obama was re-elected with a mandate to raise taxes on "The Rich" and there is no way he is going to back away from this.National Exit polling: To reduce the Deficit, We Should:
Raise Taxes on Everyone: 13% support.
Raise Taxes on those earning over $250, 000 only: 47% support.
Raise Taxes on Nobody: 25% support.
Raise Taxes only on the poor, or Undecided, or No Position: 15% support
You have 20 horny men in a bar in some Outback mining town with an attractive woman. Someone proposes a gang bang. They take a vote. The woman loses. The men have their way with her. A week later everyone's horny again but nobody can do her because her vagina is torn up.
France is headed in this direction. Hopefully the USA won't head that way too.
In the small city where I live, Romney got over 60 percentage points more than Obama. Look at male voters, older voters, white voters. They voted for Romney by large margins. A 50% to 48% victory isn't a strong mandate.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 17:40
In the small city where I live, Romney got over 60 percentage points more than Obama. Look at male voters, older voters, white voters. They voted for Romney by large margins. A 50% to 48% victory isn't a strong mandate.Nonetheless, a sufficient mandate, as majority rules. You were out-voted by 3 Million Votes, or 2 percent. In the U.S., male voters, and white voters, and old voters, have exactly the same voting power as black voters, young voters, latin voters and women voters. And you were out-voted. What is it about that that you fail to grasp?
Your small town voters get to make the local laws for your small town. But the entirety of the U.S. voting population gets it's say about national issues. And you were out-voted. You lost.
In the small city where I live, Romney got over 60 percentage points more than Obama. Look at male voters, older voters, white voters. They voted for Romney by large margins. A 50% to 48% victory isn't a strong mandate.The continued demonizing of the supposed rich, and subsequently the majority of employers in the United States will have likely consequences! Here are 2 examples you can count on. As healthcare costs rise and they are rising small business owners will push the cost directly to the employees via increased employee contributions. My company's healthcare costs are going up 12 percent next year. Furthermore you will see as a result of the high unemployment that many employers will turn their full time people into an ocean of part time employees. Thus avoiding overhead cost such as healthcare and vacation benefits inorder to protect their bottom lines. Be careful what you ask for! You just might get it! Toymann
Member #2041
11-08-12, 17:49
Folks who lack the character to live up to their own bets are disreputable and deservedly outcast in ANY society that I am aware of. Doesn't matter if they are Liberal, or Conservative, or Moderate. What they are without controversy, are douchebags who ought to be shunned.
At that close a margin, we are a divided nation. Believing that either side has a "mandate" because of a relatively few percentile points of active vs disaffected voters that swings back and forth over momentary periods of time is rather foolish.
Both parties have "led" by these swings, both have claimed a "mandate". But only time will tell how this great American experiment works out when in almost any situation, nearly 5 out of 10 people like and other half doesn't like the decision.
Having one side claim they have the will of the people because of a slight 5. X ratio edge is as stupid now as when Bush did it. Neither party has rights to mandate, and neither party has sole claim on the stupidity of this assumption other than as a PR soundbite.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 17:53
At that close a margin, we are a divided nation. Believing that either side has a "mandate" because of a relatively few percentile points of active vs disaffected voters that swings back and forth over momentary periods of time is rather foolish.
Both parties have "led" by these swings, both have claimed a "mandate". But only time will tell how this great American experiment works out when in almost any situation, nearly 5 out of 10 people like and other half doesn't like the decision.
Having one side claim they have the will of the people because of a slight 5. X ratio edge is as stupid now as when Bush did it. Neither party has rights to mandate, and neither party has sole claim on the stupidity of this assumption other than as a PR soundbite.The exit polling makes clear that the particular issue of whether or not any deficit reduction plan should include some tax increases on the wealthy, or is NOT a close call. 60% of the American Public supports it.
Folks who lack the character to live up to their own bets are disreputable and deservedly outcast in ANY society that I am aware of. Doesn't matter if they are Liberal, or Conservative, or Moderate. What they are without controversy, are douchebags.You must be a raving idiot. Thought you blocked me? My bet with Esten is good. You are a real piece of work! Go away. Toymann
Good, if you believe there are correlations between Democrat presidents and stock market performance that will repeat going forward then maybe you should buy shares from the poor misguided suckers who are selling, like me. There's no use arguing over it, profit from it.I maintain a target asset allocation and my quarterly rebalance will be Nov. 15 so most likely I will, indeed, be buying stocks.
Your small town voters get to make the local laws for your small town. But the entirety of the U.S. voting population gets it's say about national issues. And you were out-voted. You lost.The "small town", where Romney won 60 percentage points more than Obama, has a population of 150,000, 39% Hispanic, 7% Black, 54% White. You've got a point though. Look at a map of USA counties, which voted for Romney and which voted for Obama, and it's mostly painted red. People in the cities have spoken and Obama is our president for 4 more years.
Why does Obama have a mandate but the House of Representatives is irrelevant? That's not the way the Constitution was set up. The founders considered it the most democratic of the branches of government. That's why revenue bills are supposed to be written in the House and amended in the Senate. Not that it makes any difference now, since Reid bats down much of what they send him.
SnakeOilSales
11-08-12, 19:55
The continued demonizing of the supposed rich, and subsequently the majority of employers in the United States will have likely consequences! Here are 2 examples you can count on. As healthcare costs rise and they are rising small business owners will push the cost directly to the employees via increased employee contributions. My company's healthcare costs are going up 12 percent next year. Furthermore you will see as a result of the high unemployment that many employers will turn their full time people into an ocean of part time employees. Thus avoiding overhead cost such as healthcare and vacation benefits inorder to protect their bottom lines. Be careful what you ask for! You just might get it! ToymannYou are a quack and an immoral idiot that we all hope will finally be caught by Medicare for your crimes. Your Mormon slimebag candidate got taken to the cleaners on Tuesday now you and his other supporters will have to pay the price in the way of higher taxes. So bend over, open up your wallet and get ready to pay.
At that close a margin, we are a divided nation. Believing that either side has a "mandate" because of a relatively few percentile points of active vs disaffected voters that swings back and forth over momentary periods of time is rather foolish.
Both parties have "led" by these swings, both have claimed a "mandate". But only time will tell how this great American experiment works out when in almost any situation, nearly 5 out of 10 people like and other half doesn't like the decision.
Having one side claim they have the will of the people because of a slight 5. X ratio edge is as stupid now as when Bush did it. Neither party has rights to mandate, and neither party has sole claim on the stupidity of this assumption other than as a PR soundbite.And it shall come to pass that the unbelievers and impeders will suffer the wrath of Mother Nature, for they have been given the message by the Son of Heaven. Fear Ye, Fear Year! Money is thy God and woe be unto you, and you will be brought down to your knees, for you have been warned.
You are a quack and an immoral idiot that we all hope will finally be caught by Medicare for your crimes. Your Mormon slimebag candidate got taken to the cleaners on Tuesday now you and his other supporters will have to pay the price in the way of higher taxes. So bend over, open up your wallet and get ready to pay.He's guilty of Medicare crimes? For stating that some employers may switch workers to part time to avoid paying higher healthcare costs? That doesn't make sense. Do a search and see if you still believe there was an actual bet between Toymann and David. I did and I don't.
I think the liberals here are becoming drunk with power, or something like that. Black Shirt thinks he's God.
No offense Black Shirt, you've had some very thoughtful, wise posts here. But I'm really wondering about that last one.
He's guilty of Medicare crimes? For stating that some employers may switch workers to part time to avoid paying higher healthcare costs? That doesn't make sense. Do a search and see if you still believe there was an actual bet between Toymann and David. I did and I don't.
I think the liberals here are becoming drunk with power, or something like that. Black Shirt thinks he's God.
No offense Black Shirt, you've had some very thoughtful, wise posts here. But I'm really wondering about that last one.I'm looking forward to the next 4 years. If nothing gets done, there will be a American spring to force the House to it's knees.
And it shall come to pass that the unbelievers and impeders will suffer the wrath of Mother Nature, for they have been given the message by the Son of Heaven. Fear Ye, Fear Year! Money is thy God and woe be unto you, and you will be brought down to your knees, for you have been warned.
Seriously, I started thinking about your post and for a split second thought maybe I should change the direction of my life. Maybe Black Shirt is a prophet. But that was only for a split second.
Member #2041
11-08-12, 21:07
The "small town", where Romney won 60 percentage points more than Obama, has a population of 150, 000, 39% Hispanic. 7% Black. 54% White. You've got a point though. Look at a map of USA counties, which voted for Romney and which voted for Obama, and it's mostly painted red. People in the cities have spoken and Obama is our president for 4 more years.
Why does Obama have a mandate but the House of Representatives is irrelevant? That's not the way the Constitution was set up. The founders considered it the most democratic of the branches of government. That's why revenue bills are supposed to be written in the House and amended in the Senate. Not that it makes any difference now, since Reid bats down much of what they send him. Big Fucking Deal. If your point is that there is more mostly empty space that is red than blue on the map, I'll concede that issue, but ask you what the fuck that matters? Do you think that Alaska should have 30% of the votes in the USA Congress just because it has 30% of the (unpopulated) space? We've already had a great example of the sort of unqualified idiot Alaskans vote for - you betcha we have. Perhaps the Grizzley Bears in Alaska, Wyoming, and Montana are entitled to votes where there are no people living in the places?
The fact is, votes are apportioned by population. Each person gets exactly one. And while we recognize that you strict constructionists would rather that congressional representation for blacks still be calculated at 3/5 that of whites (and even then, the white "owners" were the only ones enfrachised). Thankfully, we as a society have moved well past that.
You are a quack and an immoral idiot that we all hope will finally be caught by Medicare for your crimes. Your Mormon slimebag candidate got taken to the cleaners on Tuesday now you and his other supporters will have to pay the price in the way of higher taxes. So bend over, open up your wallet and get ready to pay.Does anyone else think this is starting to get out of hand. Other than snakeboy, member and david33? Just curious? Makes for incredible entertainment though. Monger on all. Toymann
TejanoLibre
11-08-12, 21:22
You have been shown up on the forum as a blowhard, a fake, a cheater and a scumbag (for the few who already didn't realize that). Many on the forum are afraid to face you because you will then begin to abuse them in your customary hysterical ungrammatical posts. I have called you out as a coward and a fake. I would have paid off the bet had your Mormon won. But that is the difference between you and me and why I am respected on the forums and you aren't. Too bad you don't have any self respect because then you would go away and AP would be better off. But since you obviously don't have a life without AP, I imagine you will linger on until Jackson hopefully decides that your negativity on the forum is not worth the few bucks he gets from renting you a room and bans you. The majority of AP forum members and myself will count the days until that happens. Until then, everytime you start to brag about how much money you are supposed to have, all will remember that you weasled out of a bet to avoid paying a measily $350. Those are the facts and you can keep whining and posting personal insults; talk is cheap but actions are what count. Everytime a forum member meets you he will remember you as the loser who welched on his bet.
Anyone who knows me personally is aware that $350 is no big deal for me. Its not about the dollars, its about PUTTING YOUR MONEY WHERE YOUR MOUTH IS. This is why I took the bet. As far as I'm concerned showing up Toymann for what he really is (to anyone who didn't already know) , is worth far more than $350.
The case is closed.A long time ago someone told me that you should always avoid discussing Politics, Religion and Abortion if you want to keep the peace amongst friends. I guess she was right.
As for me last Tuesday, I went to the Evangelical Sermon, stopped off to vote for Obama and then took one of my girlfriends to the abortion clinic; just another day in the neighborhood!
TL
He's guilty of Medicare crimes? For stating that some employers may switch workers to part time to avoid paying higher healthcare costs? That doesn't make sense. Do a search and see if you still believe there was an actual bet between Toymann and David. I did and I don't.
I think the liberals here are becoming drunk with power, or something like that. Black Shirt thinks he's God.
No offense Black Shirt, you've had some very thoughtful, wise posts here. But I'm really wondering about that last one.Don't waste your time dude. These loons are way out of control! Toymann.
PS. Crazy liberals never let the facts get in the way! Dudes are muy loco.
Does anyone else think this is starting to get out of hand. Other than snakeboy, member and david33? Just curious? Makes for incredible entertainment though. Monger on all. ToymannA little bit.
BTW, I will PM you on the bet..... but I will be in town real soon. BTW, why did you share almost no info from your past trip ? Keeping all the good ones to yourself ??!
Hey Dems..... no need for name calling. This is a great moment.
Let those Repubs who insist on it, continue with their false stereotypes that the Democrat Party thinks rich people are evil, that the Democrat Party is all about giving people free stuff. Let them take comfort in their delusions if they insist. It matters not, except for being a drag on their party's ability to move forward.
Think of the election implications for helping reverse some of the plutocratic trends that are harming our country.
Think of the election implications for the composition of the Supreme Court.
Think of the election implications for a growing consensus that trickle-down economics don't work.
Sit back, cook a spliff, and tune in to some Mark Levin and have a good laugh !
Do a search and see if you still believe there was an actual bet between Toymann and David. I did and I don't.Ditto.
David, it's up to you to explain to us when / where your bet with Toymann took place. I had one with him, and since I read most of the political threads I would have noticed whether Toymann also had bets with others. He only had a bet with me AFAIK.
You have a lot of board cred, and I hope to enlist your help if and when I ever get to Lima. But for the readers here I think you should explain this one.
Esten, In the coming socialist proletarian republic, I hope someone like you is my local political commissar. Unlike many here, including me, you're always diplomatic. And fairminded, except when it comes to taxes.
On taxes, Boehner is saying no increase in the maximum rate and the Dems are sticking to raising the maximum rate for those over $250k. So we are talking about moving the top two brackets from 33% to 36% and 35% to 39. 6. Dems are stating a willingness to make "significant" cuts to entitlements. Split the difference on the rates, say to 35% and 37% or 34% and 38% or whatever and be done with that. Build a fence around that money and earmark it for deficit reduction. 2% payroll tax cut is set to expire. Either compromise at 1% or cut it 1% for employers and raise it 1% for employees so both pay 5. 2.
Now, on entitlements, there is cutting short term and cutting long term. I don't know how many view unemployment insurance as an entitlement but these extensions are getting ridiculous. If you can't find a job in six months there is some larger issue. So nix the extensions. Given Obamacare, why not raise the Medicare eligibility age to say 67 or 68? Cutting food stamps would just be plain mean. The maximum benefit is I believe $216 a month. Can you eat on that? Well, yeah, I can (that is pretty close to what I spend) but I know nutrition and how to shop and I am not homeless. Hungry people get restless so even if you have a conservative viewpoint you should recognize the danger in hungry mobs.
I am okay with subsidizing student loans but the people writing the laws are not doing a good job of defining things like income and need and there is abuse potential. The Democrats have to shoulder the blame for that one. However, part of the reason the definition of income is fucked up is because the tax system is too complicated.
So for tax reform (leaving out the corporate side which is fictitious) we need to simplify and consolidate the myriad educational tax breaks. We need to get rid of paying people to having children, who are not an economic advantage in an advanced society. Having children is a choice like any other. I doubt attacks on the mortgage interest deduction would be successful but it makes no intellectual sense. Charitable deductions should go. If you need these types of incentives to donate then I question both your motivation and the quality of the organization.
Legislators should take pay cuts on the order of 20% and their fringe benefits are excessive and too easy to qualify for. Make all the congressional districts twice as big and get rid of half of those fuckers. That would make for a very good election in 2014. I am sure that won't happen but I wonder what exactly would be the legal process for cutting the legislature itself. 435 people is too unwieldy even if you take cost out of the equation.
Daddy Rulz
11-09-12, 03:45
After years of this.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2010/12/08/hannity-and-andrew-mccarthy-attack-dream-act-as/174196
This.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2010/04/28/hannity-displays-b-roll-of-border-crossers-whil/163951
And this.
http://mediamatters.org/video/2012/05/01/fox-guest-michelle-fields-if-illegals-are-so-up/184362
Two days after the election where they were drubbed by the "brown" folks we now have this.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/11/08/sean-hannity-ive-evolved-on-immigration/
How do they overcome the lying liberal campaign? Did he seriously just say that? At least he was honest enough to say we have to be nicer to them because we need the votes of their cousins that are legal. Jesus what a hypocrite. All you Fox guys here get ready for a massive move to the left by your party. Seriously, a massive move. By 2016 Hillary will be the GOP nominee.
Ditto.
David, it's up to you to explain to us when / where your bet with Toymann took place. I had one with him, and since I read most of the political threads I would have noticed whether Toymann also had bets with others. He only had a bet with me AFAIK.
You have a lot of board cred, and I hope to enlist your help if and when I ever get to Lima. But for the readers here I think you should explain this one.Never read the ISG but I have never noticed any serious contribution to this thread, except his obsession with me. In the last year his focus has been obsessively ranting about ol'toymann. As best I can figure from the forwarded or copied text. Kinda wierd if ya ask me.
Congrats Esten, I am still confounded regarding Tuesdays result. Growing up in a socialist country, I left hoping to find success in capitalist society. I totally get the socialist thing. Oppressive taxes, no social class movement, etc. Etc. Luckily my last 20 years in America have been good ones. I will like many other small business owners adjust my approach to adapt to the oncoming psunami! I am already shaping my pitch to my employees explaining why their once very low cost healthcare is now substantially higher (was employee contribution 50 bucks per month for indemnity 1500 deductible in 2012, now 300 in 2013). Sadly, or luckily I am just not ready to move my 40 fulltime support staff employees from fulltime status to 60 part time employees. The savings would be dramatic (no overtime, benefits, vacation or sick liabilty for me, plus I could now really perk up my professional staff as I could tailer my benefits to a small few) but we'll see what 2013 brings. The unemployment in my state is soo high that a Craig's list ad will bring 300 resumes in just 3 hours. In the past I could never get good front office help for under 19 bucks an hour. Today the same folks are thrilled to have a job with benefits for 12-13 bucks an hour. Welcome to the new socialist america all. It's all good. Toymann
A little bit.
BTW, I will PM you on the bet. But I will be in town real soon. BTW, why did you share almost no info from your past trip? Keeping all the good ones to yourself?Let me know when you get to town buddy. I have in fact added a couple of killer new chicas to the Toymann back book! Private stock don't ya know but I'll throw in a couple for you As a perk. I only do referral of my new chicas via pm for those that are known quantities, such as yourself, and my buddies. It just doesn't pay to advertise these chicas on the board publically as sadly the local ex-pat boys and newbies often screw up the deal by overpaying and artificially creating GPS. Send me pm dude. Toymann
Member #2041
11-09-12, 12:37
I truly hope, although I genuinely doubt, that you right wingers will take this to heart:
From a Republican.
"Cry Babies And Sore Losers"
Cry Babies And Sore Losers: I'm seeing Americans post photos of our Flag hung upside down because the President won reelection. They're defending this action as a 'Naval sign of distress'. Let me tell you something: you are not on a battleship, you are a manager at McDonalds in Follansbee, WV, and you are in fact, a lunatic.
I've avoided 'spiking the football' over a great night for the President and for common sense in the Senate – Richard Murdock and Todd Akin deserved more than a loss. But I've held off, because I respect, am friends with, and on certain issues agree with, many patriotic Republicans who work hard to make this country a better place and simply disagreed with who should be Commander in Chief. That's fair and healthy.
And, I also didn't spike the football because I've lost elections before and I know how terrible it feels.
It's called maturity and not enough people in either party have it.
Cry Babies And Sore LosersThe following jaw punch is not directed at common sense Republicans, nor does it condone radicals on the Left. It is directed at the right wing fanatics who put party before country, conspiracy before reality, and ideology before science and intellect.
To Tea Party Patriots and hardcore Religious Engineers:
Republicans lost because their party leadership and most candidates feared you, listened to you, and looked the other way on important issues as you picked the dumbest, craziest nominees in key primaries (Murdock and Akin) , or converted otherwise sensible, experienced candidates to Crazy Town (Romney).
There's nothing wrong with wanting limited government. I do. There's nothing wrong with believing in God, the Golden Rule, or wanting to reduce abortions. I do, too. But you've taken it too damn far and scare the shit out of people you could otherwise persuade.
Yes, the message and messenger matter (you're failing at both, BTW) , but no Madison Avenue P. R. Firm, K Street lobbying firm, Fox News 'analyst', or local chapter of 'Freedom Works' can sell the flaming dung you're slinging.
Smart people can lose. But smart people always learn.
You didn't lose because you 'weren't conservative enough' or because the country has become full of lazy 'takers' who don't want to earn a living or just want America to 'turn in to Europe'.
You didn't lose because of Hurricane Sandy or because Chris Christie hugged the President on TV – they were both doing their jobs.
You didn't lose because of a liberal media, liberal college campuses, liberal polls that were 'weighted to Democrats' (mostly because they were accurate) , or because of 'election fraud'. Actually, that probably benefited you this time.
No. You lost because your policies, tone, conspiracies, rigid inflexibility and irrational rhetoric helped align enough moderates, swing voters, and minority groups whom otherwise could be persuaded by Republicans, to align with Democrats and a beatable incumbent.
It's not that you didn't get your message out, it's that we all actually heard it and threw up a little in our mouths.
There isn't a mandate for Democrats in this election. Liberalism wasn't rewarded in this election. However, calm pragmatism, compassion, working together, compromise and sincerity were rewarded. People may not have agreed with President Obama, but more felt he was sincere and that he understood their daily problems, fears, and dreams. If you don't trust what the polls say, take a look at who is sworn in on January 20th. I thought you'the at least believe in Math when it came to counting to 270.
Sincerity is the only thing in politics you can't fake. You can't teach it. No matter how shiny a candidate's bio is, how smooth he is, or how perfect the gray hairs rest on his temples — any average Joe on the street can spot a bullshitter.
Mitt is a generous and good man, but he didn't know who he was or 'needed' to be at any given time in that campaign. That's largely his fault for lacking core convictions or personal toughness (Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush possessed both traits – that's why they won).
But you, the right wing base of the party, who drove so many of us moderate republicans out the door years ago, were the main catalyst. Your inability to reason, compromise, or let new facts and evidence challenge your predetermined outcomes led millions of moderates to no longer be able to stand on stage with you.
Frankly, you're embarrassing – more so than a crazy family member at dinner, or having your mom drop you off at a high school dance.
You say stupid shit and look stupid saying it.
You pass amendments to ban flag burning and then hang it upside down and post it on Facebook when you lose.
You preach limited government in the economy when Democrats are in charge and then look the other way when you're in charge.
You want a government small enough to stay out of corporations and banks but big enough for bedrooms and hospital respirators (see Schiavo, Terri).
There's a hatred inside of you that burns in a way that scares normal people.
You made unlikely allies in large corporations who are more interested in tax breaks and loopholes even if the government has to cut your Medicare and Social Security or cut education to a point where states and local governments have no financial choice but to educate your children in portable trailer classrooms with 35 other students.
Would these corporations do this just to help pad their quarterly earnings reports with certain tax and regulatory policies? You bet your sweet ass they do. And you better believe they're happy to have you make the 'freedom' argument as 'concerned citizen patriots' on their behalf.
Yet, after those corporations spent billions on TV adds and herded you like sheep over the last half decade to discredit Barack Obama for everything from being a 'Godless communist' — to his 'being born in Kenya and hatching a secret plot to take down America' — to Obamacare's 'death panels and job killing regulations'.
YOU still lost.
After having a Senate Republican Leader state that his party's top priority in Congress was to make 'Obama a one term President' and a House of Representatives that blocked everything he tried to do and then had the brass to criticize him for 'not getting anything done'.
YOU still lost.
After attacking gay people who want equal protection under the law (BTW, I'm referring to the 14th amendment to the constitution, I know you forget most of the amendments after the 2nd one).
YOU still lost.
After attacking the Hispanic community who's tired of being spoken 'at' like criminals, attacking low income women who rely on Planned Parenthood for services of which 98% have nothing to do with abortion, and attacking relatively trivial things like PBS that children and adults enjoy as '1. Damn television channel that doesn't include Honey Boo Boo or a 'Fox News Breaking Alert' announcing Obama's latest 'Czar' appointment.
YOU still lost.
And after throwing all the red meat in your warped political base out to the rest of the country to eat, the majority of Americans weren't hungry for it and didn't trust ordering from your unhealthy, de-regulated menu.
YOU still lost.
You can read me the constitution, but you clearly don't have a practical understanding of what you've read, heard on television, or forwarded to your entire email list of like minded xenophobes.
This country is great because our founders were smart enough to limit the government's power and give the people enough freedom and authority to correct their own mistakes in pursuit of a 'more perfect union' (it's in the first damn line of the Preamble, in case you can't find it in your Tea Party Constitution Cliffs Notes).
Our founders were utterly brilliant and sophisticated. I don't like to speak for them, but I doubt they would have been friends with Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or Sarah Palin. Nah, they wouldn't have made the guest list at Mt. Vernon or Monticello.
But let's be clear, our founders weren't perfect. They owned slaves. Only White male property owners had a say in things. Women, blacks, native americans, and other constituencies had to wait for an American dream and in many cases, are still waiting and working for it. Speaking of work, children were working 12-16 hour days with zero safety protections in statute. Zero.
The constitution, subsequent amendments and Supreme Court rulings and opinions since 1800 aren't perfectly clear (those who think they are tend to have had a healthy serving of Kool-Aid and have never watched oral arguments at the Supreme Court).
The founders knew that they, and the constitution they drafted, weren't perfect. This is why they added a Bill of Rights and why they created a Supreme Court and a process that has allowed us to add 27 amendments to their work of art.
Their imperfection is what led to a Civil War to prove that human and civil rights aren't a 'states' rights issue' – they're endowed by our creator, not by legislatures in Mississippi or Alabama, and they're protected equally in our constitution, but also in our democratically passed laws.
I run from the Capitol steps to the Lincoln Memorial most mornings that I'm in Washington. I may not be fast or smart, but I can read what's carved in stone.
Please. I welcome a challenge to what I've said. If you think because I voted for President Obama that I'm a socialist or that I don't want a better America, I'm happy to take time from running a business I've co-founded and time from money I'm trying to raise for Big Brothers Big Sisters of America to pause and give you a fresh one. At no charge.
But I do ask this: be a real Patriot. Look at that flag you've hung upside down. Look at what you've done to it and what that means. Thousands of our bravest men and women, braver than me, just lost limbs and in many cases their lives so that Iraqis and Afghanis could vote however they see fit. I did that on Tuesday and so did you. That's what that flag stands for – equal access to a process, not a guarantee for any of our desired outcomes.
A country that defeated Hitler, Mussolini, and bin Laden won't crumble because the guy you wanted to be President got beat.
You lost. Now learn from it.
Sincerely,
Guest Contributor, Rob Ellsworth, 'A Proud American'
http://samuel-warde.com/2012/11/cry-babies-and-sore-losers/
Does anyone else think this is starting to get out of hand. Other than snakeboy, member and david33? Just curious? Makes for incredible entertainment though. Monger on all. ToymannSpanish has the perfect term for Toymann: SINVERGUENZA. The English translation is "without shame". Here is a guy who welshes on a bet and then says that I only mentioned the bet again when the polls showed Obama was going to win. Anyone who reads back on the forum will see that this is just another of this loser's lies. All his heroes on Fox News were still thinking that the Slimey Mormon was going to win up until election night. So except for his few asskisser friends on the forum, all can see that this guy can't be trusted, doesn't put his money where his mouth is, is just a scumbag and should be ostracized by all honest forum members who DO pay their debts.
Now that its unfortunately obvious that he won't slink away in shame, hopefully other forum members will stop fearing his insulting diatribes and continue to call out this worm whenever necessary.
He's guilty of Medicare crimes? For stating that some employers may switch workers to part time to avoid paying higher healthcare costs? That doesn't make sense. Do a search and see if you still believe there was an actual bet between Toymann and David. I did and I don't.
I think the liberals here are becoming drunk with power, or something like that. Black Shirt thinks he's God.
No offense Black Shirt, you've had some very thoughtful, wise posts here. But I'm really wondering about that last one.Rise of Nazi Germany. 9/11, assassination of JFK, southern slavery and of course the Holocost. That was all me! Just wanted to get the record straight! IALOTFLMAO!
My final comment to the obsessed David33. You have now been told by two longtime posters on this board that you are full of it regarding any type of bet between us. I understand your last long winded obsessive rant was quite the doozy! LMAO!
Suggest you double your medication for the next two weeks till all that crazy angry man stuff subsides. Your clearly obsessive behavior regarding My Toymann Persona is fine by me but you need to chill out as it should be clear to you by now that you are just making a fool of yourself. Furthermore, all that venom can't be good for you on the long run. LOL!
Finally, your aggressive attacks on Esten and TinyDude are just not warranted. These boys have been around for quite some time and are hardly Toymann shills. If you must continue your crazy rants please direct them at me. Just because they agree with me regarding your imagined bet doesn't warrant the innuendo and drama that fills your posts regarding Them. Any reasonable person would not support your position of any type of bet between us. You're just making a fool of yourself.
Monger on all. Toymann
I can only hope that your David33 persona is very different from your real life persona! You might be surprised that in many cases a silly Internet chat board persona differs greatly from the posters real life persona. That is true of both myself and the member who has been posting constantly on this thread. Met him in person not long ago and we got along just fine! In fact we share a love of red wine. Go figure. Maybe we should send a few cases of Malbec to the US Congress. LOL
Member #2041
11-09-12, 17:07
I can only hope that your David33 persona is very different from your real life persona! You might be surprised that in many cases a silly Internet chat board persona differs greatly from the posters real life persona. That is true of both myself and the member who has been posting constantly on this thread. Met him in person not long ago and we got along just fine! In fact we share a love of red wine. Go figure. Maybe we should send a few cases of Malbec to the US Congress. LOLWe got along because I decided to humor you, knowing I only was going to be around you for one day, and because, despite the fact that I disagree with pretty much everything you are about, and I have a complete lack of respect for you and your set of values. I did recognize that we have similar tastes in both wine and women, so it would be easy to be civil with you for one day. The fact is, I deal with pompous jackasses like you all the time in real life, so I am able to put on the act for a short stretch. And BTW, I've also hung out with David_33 for some time in Sosua, and he set me up with some nice chicas in Lima, including the single best companion I have ever been with during ANY of my international travels. Yes, she even significantly overshadowed Evian. And unlike with my interactions with you, Toymann, I don't have to put on an act of humoring him to get along with David_33. I actually like socializing with the guy, and recognize that we have some intrinsic deeply held values in common, not just some superficial stuff like finding the same women attractive or enjoying red wine.
And yes, I still have you blocked, but I did still choose to view some of your posts because I was curious about how you would justify your weaseling out of the bet with David_33, despite the fact that David_33 spent the entire last couple of weeks before the election - when the polling was in fact the strongest for Romney than during the entire rest of the campaign, trying to finalize the arrangements for your wager - but, of course, you went out of your way to duck out on it.
Ditto.
David, it's up to you to explain to us when / where your bet with Toymann took place. I had one with him, and since I read most of the political threads I would have noticed whether Toymann also had bets with others. He only had a bet with me AFAIK.
You have a lot of board cred, and I hope to enlist your help if and when I ever get to Lima. But for the readers here I think you should explain this one.Just read way back on this thread to when Toymann out of nowhere started personally insulting me, thinking that I would be intimidated by his vitriol like other forum members. He then challenged me to the bet on the FORUM. I accepted ON THE FORUM. I would put forward that accepting the bet ON THE FORUM is more valid than by PM. Even Tiny12, his fellow personal insulter defender here can see that this is logical. Just read back. Its all there. I am amazed that anyone with any honor still has anything to do with this guy. IMHO he should have been banned long ago for his comportment on the forum, but Jackson is the boss and its up to him if he wants to keep someone on AP who has always been a negative presence.
As far as my lack of posting on AP goes; should I write a lot of posts bragging about how much money I have and my fishing trips? I only post when I have something worth posting about, such as my opinion of having a Mormon in the White House, or referring to a blowhard forum member who doesn't pay his bets.
We got along because I decided to humor you, knowing I only was going to be around you for one day, and because, despite the fact that I disagree with pretty much everything you are about, and I have a complete lack of respect for you and your set of values. I did recognize that we have similar tastes in both wine and women, so it would be easy to be civil with you for one day. The fact is, I deal with pompous jackasses like you all the time in real life, so I am able to put on the act for a short stretch. And BTW, I've also hung out with David_33 for some time in Sosua, and he set me up with some nice chicas in Lima, including the single best companion I have ever been with during ANY of my international travels. Yes, she even significantly overshadowed Evian. And unlike with my interactions with you, Toymann, I don't have to put on an act of humoring him to get along with David_33. I actually like socializing with the guy, and recognize that we have some intrinsic deeply held values in common, not just some superficial stuff like finding the same women attractive or enjoying red wine.
And yes, I still have you blocked, but I did still choose to view some of your posts because I was curious about how you would justify your weaseling out of the bet with David_33, despite the fact that David_33 spent the entire last couple of weeks before the election. When the polling was in fact the strongest for Romney than during the entire rest of the campaign, trying to finalize the arrangements for your wager. But, of course, you went out of your way to duck out on it.The purpose of my last post was quite simple.
First, I wanted to confirm that in spite of your bombastic claims that you had blocked me, that consistent with your short posting history on this board that really shows how full of crap you are, you were indeed reading my posts. Check!
Second, I had been suspicious for some time that you and david33 had some sort of cock-in-mouth type relationship. Check!
Thank you for confirming my suspicions and in fact broadcasting that to the entire board. This was way easier than I expected. Too funny. You took the bait faster than a 10 kilo dorado during the beta. Thanks again. You are quite a piece of work!
IALOTFLMAO. See ya. Toymann
I had been suspicious for some time that you and david33 had some sort cock in mouth type relationship. Check!
And Please don't mix us up with you and Tiny12, and I am sorry to destroy your delusion but I didn't have any idea that I knew Member #2041 until I read his latest post. I HELP OUT a large number of forum members in Peru and travel to Asia a few times a year meeting even more guys there, therefore I remember few. Note how often I have thanked him or supported him during the existence of this thread. Once, a couple of days ago. Compare that with you and your fellow personal insulter Tiny12.
We are just two of the many honest, standup forum members who see you for what you are but WE aren't afraid to tell you to your face. Your personal stock is at an all time low, enjoy being known as a liar and a cheat who doesn't put his money where his mouth is.
Anyway, I won't post any more about this situation. That Toymann is a dishonest worm will be clear to anyone who cares to read back on the thread. I suggest he spend the $350 he saved by being a welcher on Tiny12 to assure that at least one person will continue to support him.
I think Toymann should tone down his posts. While his biting sarcasm is entertaining when you're on the same side of an issue, I think he'd benefit from being less confrontational. And David should fuck a Mormon and get it all out of his system. It's actually not as hard as it sounds. Young single Mormon women are always looking to convert someone and get married ASAP, so they can have lots of children and occupy a higher position in the hereafter. So if you're willing to lie it's a piece of cake. If you're into noncompetive sports (ugly Mormon women) it's even easier.
David, I did read back on the thread and don't believe there was a bet. I don't understand your logic. Still I'll donate the cost of a night at Madaho's to your favorite non-political charity if you'll drop it. It would need to be something I could send a USA dollar check to.
I think Toymann should tone down his posts. While his biting sarcasm is entertaining when you're on the same side of an issue, I think he'd benefit from being less confrontational. And David should fuck a Mormon and get it all out of his system. It's actually not as hard as it sounds. Young single Mormon women are always looking to convert someone and get married ASAP, so they can have lots of children and occupy a higher position in the hereafter. So if you're willing to lie it's a piece of cake. If you're into noncompetive sports (ugly Mormon women) it's even easier.
David, I did read back on the thread and don't believe there was a bet. I don't understand your logic. Still I'll donate the cost of a night at Madaho's to your favorite non-political charity if you'll drop it. It would need to be something I could send a USA dollar check to. And I will throw in a Body Massage (trimmings are included) at a massage joint of your choosing in Bangkok. Collectible in person in Bangkok. Hurry, service is going downhill fast here, too.
When I was a teenager in Reno, I used to lie to those LDS chicks all the time. Not just for pussy but for free meals and to do my laundry at their parents' houses. Usually I could get fed about three times per gal until a whole bunch of those white shirted fucks would show up at my door. I would invite them, crack open a beer, and they would usually leave. If that didn't work I would fire up a joint and then they would for sure leave. But once school went back in session in the fall a bunch of them compared notes and that was the end of that. Then I had to go over to Sparks and fuck the vascas, but at least the food was better.
Member #2041
11-10-12, 12:49
I think someone needs to do a well-being check on the guy. He was SO CERTAIN that Romney was winning big, and the polling was wrong, and I was naive for believing the polling, that I genuinely fear he may have done himself harm when his fictitious fantasy world came crashing down and he had to face the reality of 4 more years of a "Kenyan Muslim Marxist who faked his college transcripts" as the President of the United States.
For those who want to pay the welcher's bet, I was going to give the money to Jackson's maids anyway. The bet was just a failed attempt at shutting this guy up.
Once upon a time, I did manage to nail a Mormon dealer in Las Vegas. She may have been lapsed though.
Has Esten's name ever appeared in any of my posts?
Daddy Rulz
11-10-12, 14:21
For those who want to pay the welcher's bet, I was going to give the money to Jackson's maids anyway. The bet was just a failed attempt at shutting this guy up.Could you please publish either the post number of the bet or the day it was made on? I'd really like to know what happened.
Could you please publish either the post number of the bet or the day it was made on? I'd really like to know what happened.Toymann's post on 1/6/2012:
I feel quite comfortable the reverse will occur dude. I have more confidence in the US electorate than that. Obomanation is dead man walking, and so is the liberal senate. Tick Tick Tick! Time will only tell brother. Just remember who focasted all this first. Called this shot a year ago on the forumn. He who laughs last always last best! Happy Mongering free-thinker. Toymann.
Ps. Any interest in a Madahos wager Chezz or David? Your liberal brother Esten has crawled back under his rock to protect himself from the oncoming GOP tsunami!
Pps. You liberals have such a short memory. Did you both already forget what happened last November. Keep whistling past the grave yard boys. IALOTFLMAO!David's post on 2/24/2012:
Well, I was hoping that Newt would get the nomination, but it looks like Whiny Willard, baptizer extraordinaire will be able to buy it. So seeing that someone as stupid as Toymann (remember South Carolina?) is convinced that the Mormon will beat Obama: I am now taking the bet of the "man" who needs toys to back up his lack of testosterone, dimension and technique and has his head up his ass. Since I don't like to be seen with losers nor ugly individuals who can't spell, after Obama wins, the limp dick Toymann can give the Madaho's money I have won to Jackson and I'll pick it up from him. By the way Toymann, you have been blocked (by Jackson) , so any future girlish insulting posts referring to whale watchers will not be seen by me. Maybe they will interest others, although I doubt it. So don't spend all your money on more toys or your fishing trips and make sure my Madaho's money (taking inflation into account let's call it an even 2000 pesos) is put aside for November.
Obviously if the Republicans get smart and don't run Willard, the bet's off.Toymann didn't respond to David's post.
Last week a stock broker asked if I had any INTEREST in a block of shares in a very small, very illiquid company. He didn't tell me the number of shares or the price the seller wanted, although I knew it would have been around 0.72, which was the price the shares were trading at then. If I call him back over a month later and say yes, I'll buy the shares at 0.72, he's going to scratch his head. I'm not sure that's a good analogy, as I'm not much of a better. But since you could buy Romney or Obama on www.intrade.com, the betting site, and the odds were constantly changing, maybe it's okay. Anyway, from my perspective it wouldn't have been a bet. I do believe that David honestly thinks it was a bet though.
Also please note that Toymann asked if there was interest in a "Madaho's wager." David proposed a cash bet of 2000 pesos and said it would be cancelled if someone besides Romney were nominated. They didn't agree to terms.
What wager would Toymann have proposed, if David had followed up in January? Based on Toymann's post above and his negotiations here with Esten, it might have involved the U.S. Senate.
Daddy Rulz
11-10-12, 22:35
Anyway, from my perspective it wouldn't have been a bet. I do believe that David honestly thinks it was a bet though.
Also please note that Toymann asked if there was interest in a "Madaho's wager." David proposed a cash bet of 2000 pesos and said it would be cancelled if someone besides Romney were nominated. They didn't agree to terms.
What wager would Toymann have proposed, if David had followed up in January? Based on Toymann's post above and his negotiations here with Esten, it might have involved the USA Senate.I agree Toyjoy asked if there was interest in a madahos bet, he didn't propose a bet. I am a betting man and a wager must be declared and accepted. Had Toyjoy said, David I bet you the cost of a night at Madaho that The Romnybot defeats The Obamanation in the general election both electoral and popular. And David said "bet." Than that is a wager. The openness of his question doesn't constitute a wager because terms hadn't been agreed to. Without more posts to reference I would agree there is no wager here.
Toymann's post on 1/6/2012:
David's post on 2/24/2012:
Toymann didn't respond to David's post.Good work Tiny. I figured this must have been a comment or two in passing, not a back and forth virtual 'handshake' like I had with Toymann. This is why I didn't recall it. Also the two posts are spaced by over a month.
I think David has some cause here. Either Toymann reneged on a bet, or Toymann reneged on closing a bet he offered. I was about to add another possibility, that Toymann missed David's acceptance. But David reminded the board of the bet before the election, so there was time for Toymann to go back and verify David's acceptance.
There should be no confusion on the prize. Toymann didn't just offer to make a bet, he specifically offered a Madahos bet. We all know he wasn't talking "I'll buy you a drink at Madahos". It's a night at the club with chica costs included. David understood this and replied with a 2000 peso figure, which happens to be exactly what I wagered with Toymann.
The terms should be a moot point. Whether it would have been an Electoral College win, or popular vote, or combined with a Senate win, it doesn't matter since Romney / Republicans lost them all.
Toymann can perhaps get out of this on a technicality, that there wasn't a virtual handshake on specific terms. But he offered the Madahos bet in the first place, so there was clearly intent. Any difference between "wager" vs "interest in a wager" is semantics. Both Toymann and David have cause on their positions. I would suggest one resolution would be for Toymann to say he'll make a donation of $X pesos to Jackson's maids (which David said he would have done) , and Toymann can decide what $X is reasonable based on the weight of both sides positions.
Esten, Respectfully, I disagree. Please remember that David waited over a month from when Toymann indicated interest before he arbitrarily defined the terms of a bet. Also that Toymann proposed to you a bet that involved the Presidency, Senate and House. I think it would have ended in a draw, but don't remember for sure. You wisely insisted on a straight bet on the presidency.
Florida has been declared the winner, so the mandate becomes just a bit clearer.
Member #2041
11-11-12, 23:17
Florida has been declared the winner, so the mandate becomes just a bit clearer. Also, Obama's margin in the popular vote is up to 3.3 Million, and at 50.5% vs. 47.9%
BTW, that's a larger popular vote majority than Bush had over Kerry in 2004 (and of course, Gore actually carried the popular vote in 2000).
Silver Star
11-11-12, 23:55
Florida has been declared the winner, so the mandate becomes just a bit clearer.I don't see how less than a 3% margin of victory and barely over 50% vote total is a mandate. A sliver above majority in popular vote is hardly a mandate.
I don't see how less than a 3% margin of victory and barely over 50% vote total is a mandate. A sliver above majority in popular vote is hardly a mandate.Not to mention that the other major party won the House of Representatives, so that nothing has really changed since before the election.
You'd best not question in this forum whether there's a strong mandate though. You may be accused like I was of believing in slavery, and thinking you deserve one vote for yourself and an additional 0.6 votes for each of your slaves. Anyone who questions Obama's strong mandate is a racist, of course.
Member #2041
11-12-12, 00:46
Not to mention that the other major party won the House of Representatives, so that nothing has really changed since before the election.
You'd best not question in this forum whether there's a strong mandate though. You may be accused like I was of believing in slavery, and thinking you deserve one vote for yourself and an additional 0. 6 votes for each of your slaves.Did you know that the Democrats got more votes for the House than the Republicans did in this election? The only reason the Republicans still held the House (although they lost several seats) is that they very effectively gerrymandered the districts during the period that they controlled the House after the 2000 census and again after the 2010 census.
In any case, from this election, we know the following:
- Dems had a majority of the Popular Vote in total for all House Seats, a big edge for all Senate Seats (they had an advantage here, with twice as many Senate incumbents), as well as the Presidency.
- Exit polling showed that 60% of voters approved of increasing taxes on those earning over $250K (with only 25% opposing this).
Obama's popular mandate was larger than either of G.W. Bush's elections, and his electoral mandate was FAR larger (by like 20%)
I don't see how less than a 3% margin of victory and barely over 50% vote total is a mandate. A sliver above majority in popular vote is hardly a mandate.I'm the one who said it was a "bit clearer" mandate, and I was referring to the electoral vote and not the popular vote. But, if you look at the definition of the word 'mandate,' you will see that degrees of majority are not part of the definition. In fact, dictionary.com gives an example of a mandate versus a clear mandate. So, I am saying it is a clearer mandate. 50.1% is a mandate. Look it up.
Did you know that the Democrats got more votes for the House than the Republicans did in this election?Yes I knew that. But I still do not believe the margin of victory or votes represents a strong mandate. Democrats have been gerrymandering in California and with time the tables will turn elsewhere. You'll likely get what you want, a country controlled just by your party and the Europeanization of America.
Member #2041
11-12-12, 01:09
Yes I knew that. But I still do not believe the margin of victory or votes represents a strong mandate. Democrats have been gerrymandering in California and with time the tables will turn elsewhere. You'll likely get what you want, a country controlled just by your party and the Europeanization of America.So you are aware of the facts, but you simply would like to re-define the word Mandate. Got it.
Silver Star
11-12-12, 01:15
I'm the one who said it was a "bit clearer" mandate, and I was referring to the electoral vote and not the popular vote. But, if you look at the definition of the word 'mandate,' you will see that degrees of majority are not part of the definition. In fact, dictionary.com gives an example of a mandate versus a clear mandate. So, I am saying it is a clearer mandate. 50.1% is a mandate. Look it up.Thanks. This is what I came up with (see below). I was thinking mandate meant around 10% margin of victory in popular vote. Electoral vote totals are mostly winner take all, and distort popular vote percentages. I don't see winning by less than 3% as a large margin of victory.
In politics, a mandate is the authority granted by a constituency to act as its representative. [1]
The concept of a government having a legitimate mandate to govern via the fair winning of a democratic election is a central idea of democracy. New governments who attempt to introduce policies that they did not make public during an election campaign are said to not have a legitimate mandate to implement such policies.
Elections, especially ones with a large margin of victory, are often said to give the newly elected government or elected official a mandate to put into effect certain policies. [2] Also, the period during which a government serves between elections is often referred to as a mandate and when the government seeks re-election it is said to be seeking a "new mandate".
Silver Star
11-12-12, 01:22
So you are aware of the facts, but you simply would like to re-define the word Mandate. Got it.Should be interesting how the administration will be handling CO and WA, as there is a MANDNATE for legal marijuana there, will the Feds under Obama circumvent that and intervene with DEA raids? Plus Obama has smoked it himself. Obama won both of these states too, with MANDATE margins. Hopefully they will do the right thing and respect the will of the people in both states and leave them alone.
Silver Star
11-12-12, 01:24
Did you know that the Democrats got more votes for the House than the Republicans did in this election? The only reason the Republicans still held the House (although they lost several seats) is that they very effectively gerrymandered the districts during the period that they controlled the House after the 2000 census and again after the 2010 census.
In any case, from this election, we know the following:
. Dems had a majority of the Popular Vote in total for all House Seats, a big edge for all Senate Seats (they had an advantage here, with twice as many Senate incumbents) , as well as the Presidency.
. Exit polling showed that 60% of voters approved of increasing taxes on those earning over $250K (with only 25% opposing this).
Obama's popular mandate was larger than either of G. W. Bush's elections, and his electoral mandate was FAR larger (by like 20%) -
Exit polling showed that 60% of voters approved of increasing taxes on those earning over $250K (with only 25% opposing this).
My reaction is.
Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.
Should be interesting how the administration will be handling CO and WA, as there is a MANDNATE for legal marijuana there, will the Feds under Obama circumvent that and intervene with DEA raids? Plus Obama has smoked it himself. Obama won both of these states too, with MANDATE margins. Hopefully they will do the right thing and respect the will of the people in both states and leave them alone.It doesn't look good, as the Obama administration has been much more aggressive about shutting down medical marijuana growers and sellers than the Bush administration.
Back in 2008 I saw some possible silver linings to Obama being elected. A slowdown in the war on drugs was one of them. Also not being as anal with illegal immigrants, lower defense spending, a quick end to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and better standing in the the Muslim world (where I do some business). None of that happened though.
you simply would like to re-define the word Mandate. Got it. No, that's not true. However, apparently you would like to re-define the word "strong."
Member #2041
11-12-12, 01:54
As you would like to re-define the word "strong." I never said it was a strong mandate. Show me where I said that, rather than you just making up more bullshit. A mandate is a mandate. 50.1 % is a mandate. So is 60%. And Obama got a mandate.
I never said it was a strong mandate. A mandate is a mandate. 50. 1 % is a mandate. So is 60. And Obama got one.I said it was not a "strong mandate." You said I was mistaken. As to me making up bull shit, isn't that a little hypocritical? Like you making up bullshit about Toymann?
Member #2041
11-12-12, 01:59
I said it was not a "strong mandate." You said I was mistaken.I said it was a mandate. If I said you were mistaken, it was that you were mistaken if you were denying that Obama had a mandate, when he quite obviously does.
So are you now agreeing that he has a mandate? Because if you disagree, THAT is where you are mistaken. If you acknowledge that Obama has a mandate, then you wouldn't be mistaken. Which is it?
Member #2041
11-12-12, 02:02
I said it was not a "strong mandate." You said I was mistaken. As to me making up bull shit, isn't that a little hypocritical? Like you making up bullshit about Toymann?Every fiber of Toymann's being is bullshit.
I perceived he was intentionally evading David_33's attempt to finalize the specific detail of the wager that Toymann proposed and David accepted - and I still perceive that to be the case. This may be a difference of opinion, because I recognize Toymann's normal deceitfulness as a modus operandi, whereas you are naively inclined to give him the same benefit of the doubt you would give someone who has personal integrity - despite the fact that Toymann has, to me, forfeited that sort of consideration through his normal conduct. That is your error in judgment, IMHO, but I will concede that we simply differ on whether or not Toymann is entitled to the sort of consideration one would generally give someone who hasn't demonstrate that they are unworthy of it, as he has.
I said it was a mandate. If I said you were mistaken, it was that you were mistaken if you were denying that Obama had a mandate, when he quite obviously does.
So are you now agreeing that he has a mandate? Because if you disagree, THAT is where you are mistaken. If you acknowledge that Obama has a mandate, then you wouldn't be mistaken. Which is it?For the third time, every time I used the phrase "strong mandate". When something involves you or your friends or your party you have no regard for the truth. You just obscure and make stuff up. Over and out.
Should be interesting how the administration will be handling CO and WA, as there is a MANDNATE for legal marijuana there, will the Feds under Obama circumvent that and intervene with DEA raids? Plus Obama has smoked it himself. Obama won both of these states too, with MANDATE margins. Hopefully they will do the right thing and respect the will of the people in both states and leave them alone.CO's governor, a Dem who did not support the law because he fears competition for his alcohol selling establishments and / or is a hypocrite who blazes up extensively, is trying to get some guidance from the feds but they have no incentive to give any. CO's attorney general, John Suthers, very far to the right, has said he will indeed abide by the mandate. The popular vote was a similar 53% to 47%, so one can certainly argue about the strength of the mandate.
Some are saying that tokers will benefit by lower prices but if they regulate the growing the way they regulate the medical marijuana, which would NOT be the mandate to 'regulate marijuana like alcohol,' there could also be higher prices if demand exceeds currently available supply. Of course, Republicans would argue that supply mysteriously creates its own demand even absent sharing profit with labor (hint: this fails to create markets with effective demand; in general Republicans have trouble distinguishing between demand as defined by douche bags like Hayek and effective demand). My best guess is CO will restrict sales to liquor stores because that will be the most cost effective method of regulating it. That would certainly work for me as it would combine my errands and thus reduce my carbon footprint.
The feds did come in and close dispensaries in Colorado. Dispensaries were allowed to open when the nearest school was more than X feet away but then some bullshit charter schools opened up and they got shut down. There is also the problem that banks won't deal with dispensaries, and if weed remains illegal under federal law, I don't see why that would change. That might dissuade liquor stores from selling weed.
Member #2041
11-12-12, 02:10
For the third time, every time I used the phrase "strong mandate". When something involves you or your friends or your party you have no regard for the truth. You just obscure and make stuff up. Over and out.Mandates are not strong or weak, they are simply mandates. They exist or they don't. And Obama has one, just as he had one to pursue national healthcare during his first term, and as Ronald Reagan had one to pursue his policies that he ran on during his Presidency.
-
Exit polling showed that 60% of voters approved of increasing taxes on those earning over $250K (with only 25% opposing this).
My reaction is.
Democracy is 2 wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.Works for me. I was hiking with a chica and she asked what I would do if we saw a bear. I said,"I would run." She said,"No one can outrun a bear." I said,"I don't have to outrun the bear; I just have to outrun YOU." That is why I say whatever party is in power, I will find a way to beat their system.
Member #2041
11-12-12, 02:12
For the third time, every time I used the phrase "strong mandate". When something involves you or your friends or your party you have no regard for the truth. You just obscure and make stuff up. Over and out.So, irrespective of it's strength, Do you agree that Obama got a mandate from the electorate? Simple Question, answerable with a Yes, or a No.
Here's a hint: Answering anything other than YES, would show you to be mistaken. After you answer the simple Yes/No, THEN feel free to embellish or qualify your answer.
God is on the side of the better gerrymanderer.
Silver Star
11-12-12, 04:00
CO's governor, a Dem who did not support the law because he fears competition for his alcohol selling establishments and / or is a hypocrite who blazes up extensively, is trying to get some guidance from the feds but they have no incentive to give any. CO's attorney general, John Suthers, very far to the right, has said he will indeed abide by the mandate. The popular vote was a similar 53% to 47, so one can certainly argue about the strength Of the mandate.
Some are saying that tokers will benefit by lower prices but if they regulate the growing the way they regulate the medical marijuana, which would NOT be the mandate to 'regulate marijuana like alcohol, ' there could also be higher prices if demand exceeds currently available supply. Of course, Republicans would argue that supply mysteriously creates its own demand even absent sharing profit with labor (hint: this fails to create markets with effective demand; in general Republicans have trouble distinguishing between demand as defined by douche bags like Hayek and effective demand). My best guess is CO will restrict sales to liquor stores because that will be the most cost effective method of regulating it. That would certainly work for me as it would combine my errands and thus reduce my carbon footprint.
The feds did come in and close dispensaries in Colorado. Dispensaries were allowed to open when the nearest school was more than X feet away but then some bullshit charter schools opened up and they got shut down. There is also the problem that banks won't deal with dispensaries, and if weed remains illegal under federal law, I don't see why that would change. That might dissuade liquor stores from selling weed.Ok, so the mandate in Colorado is the citizens there want to legalize weed, but then they also want to retain Obama / Holder so they can crack down on it then? (Scratching my head) Should be fun to see how this plays out. Hopefully Obama will have another revelation on this and change his ways, just like he figured out marriage equality right before the election. Pot prohibition is a collosal failure and a complete waste of money. Fortunately CO and WA have figured this one out.
So, irrespective of it's strength, Do you agree that Obama got a mandate from the electorate? Simple Question, answerable with a Yes, or a No.
Here's a hint: Answering anything other than YES, would show you to be mistaken. After you answer the simple Yes / No, THEN feel free to embellish or qualify your answer.Define mandate.
Seems the sides here are stuck after the generic Oxford def of given authority to act and arguing over what fraction of percent over 50.1 constitutes the street vernacular definition of a mantle of legitimacy to represent a broad majority definition vs you won, but don't have a "mandate"
Your reply above of "Answering anything other than YES, would show you to be mistaken" means you must have an exact answer. So what is it? At what quantified percent above 50.xx do you believe a "mandate" exists? And other than the simple definition of given authority, what do you define "mandate" as?
Politically, I don't think there's much question that politicos on both sides pretend a "mandate" is broad support to represent and enact upon the wil of the overall nation. So back to what percent does this magical line exist?
IMO when it's so close to half the people not approving, neither side has a "mandate" as used in common political and street vernacular.
Member #2041
11-12-12, 04:20
Define mandate.
Seems the sides here are stuck after the generic Oxford def of given authority to act and arguing over what fraction of percent over 50. 1 constitutes the street vernacular definition of a mantle of legitimacy to represent a broad majority definition vs you won, but don't have a "mandate"
Your reply above of "Answering anything other than YES, would show you to be mistaken" means you must have an exact answer. So what is it? At what quantified percent above 50. Xx do you believe a "mandate" exists? And other than the simple definition of given authority, what do you define "mandate" as?
Politically, I don't think there's much question that politicos on both sides pretend a "mandate" is broad support to represent and enact upon the wil of the overall nation. So back to what percent does this magical line exist?
IMO when it's so close to half the people not approving, neither side has a "mandate"One single vote more than half represents a mandate, in any vote where Majority rules.
60 Million and one out of exactly 120 Million represents a mandate. Not strong, not weak, simply, a mandate.
Anyone who failed to protest George W. Bush claiming he had a mandate in 2004 has no case to make that Obama does not have a mandate here, since Obama's margin of victory is larger than Bush's was then.
One single vote more than half represents a mandate, in any vote where Majority rules.
60 Million and one out of exactly 120 Million represents a mandate. Not strong, not weak, simply, a mandate.
Anyone who failed to protest George W. Bush claiming he had a mandate in 2004 has no case to make that Obama does not have a mandate here, since Obama's margin of victory is larger than Bush's was.Then your def matches exactly the Oxford definition, so your example above is right.
But with respect, the common usage of "mandate" is not just the simple definition of being given the authority to act. Obviously by constitutional powers any president has that even if they won by skin of their teeth. The common usage in both street vernacular and especially political vernacular is the implication of having the broad backing and 'will of the people'
IMO when the non-backers vs backers are so close to half, neither side has what politicos of both sides try to assume is a "mandate". Obama does not, Bush did not.
And yes. I've thought both parties, including Bush, were idiots for claiming mandate. Closest thing to a mandate as politicos define it I've seen was the very short period of time after 9/11 that Bush did indeed have a mandate to go after the 9/11 perpetrators. Which then fell apart shortly after based on differences of opinion of how we should and shouldn't act re that objective
Voting for a party doesn't mean you have to agree with their whole plank. Dems are idiots for not dropping the entitlement crutch. Republicans are idiots for mindlessly IMO refusing to allow stem cell and other regenerative research. Just two examples of many for both parties that I personally find as my swing issues. I vote with the party that pisses me off less. Currently that is repub, but has been dem before. Neither has had a mandate outside very specific one off or temporary issues.
Silver Star
11-12-12, 05:04
Then your def matches exactly the Oxford definition, so your example above is right.
But with respect, the common usage of "mandate" is not just the simple definition of being given the authority to act. Obviously by constitutional powers any president has that even if they won by skin of their teeth. The common usage in both street vernacular and especially political vernacular is the implication of having the broad backing and 'will of the people'
IMO when the non-backers vs backers are so close to half, neither side has what politicos of both sides try to assume is a "mandate". Obama does not, Bush did not.
And yes. I've thought both parties, including Bush, were idiots for claiming mandate. Closest thing to a mandate as politicos define it I've seen was the very short period of time after 9/11 that Bush did indeed have a mandate to go after the 9/11 perpetrators. Which then fell apart shortly after based on differences of opinion of how we should and shouldn't act re that objective
Voting for a party doesn't mean you have to agree with their whole plank. Dems are idiots for not dropping the entitlement crutch. Republicans are idiots for mindlessly IMO refusing to allow stem cell and other regenerative research. Just two examples of many for both parties that I personally find as my swing issues. I vote with the party that pisses me off less. Currently that is repub, but has been dem before. Neither has had a mandate outside very specific one off or temporary issues.Mpxy.
Have you looked at the Libertarian Party, they are against the failed welfare (and warfare) state, and support privately finded stem cell research. Maybe you can vote FOR something instead of against what pisses you off the least.
Member #3320
11-12-12, 15:50
Facebook friends abandon Mitt Romney: It's been said that at times of adversity, you learn who your real friends are. Well, Mitt Romney doesn't have as many 'real' friends as he might have thought. On Saturday, the Daily Dot reported that GOP presidential candidate was losing Facebook friends at an incredible pace. Since he lost on election night. 86, 337 people have 'un-liked' Romney's Facebook page — that's an 'un-like' rate of almost 800 an hour. Oops! .
Facebook friends abandon Mitt Romney: It's been said that at times of adversity, you learn who your real friends are. Well, Mitt Romney doesn't have as many 'real' friends as he might have thought. On Saturday, the Daily Dot reported that GOP presidential candidate was losing Facebook friends at an incredible pace. Since he lost on election night. 86,337 people have 'un-liked' Romney's Facebook page — that's an 'un-like' rate of almost 800 an hour. Oops!And on that "Let's kick the man while he's down" note from Member #3320, I'm closing this thread.
Thanks,
Jackson