2012 Elections in the USA

[QUOTE=Tiny12; 429002]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.[/QUOTE]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.

[QUOTE=Tiny12; 429002]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.[/QUOTE]"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.

[QUOTE=SnakeOilSales;429004]"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.[/QUOTE]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.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;429007]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.[/QUOTE]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.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;429007]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.[/QUOTE]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

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.

[QUOTE=Mpexy; 429011]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.[/QUOTE]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.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;429010]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.[/QUOTE]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

[QUOTE=Tiny12;428999]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.[/QUOTE]I maintain a target asset allocation and my quarterly rebalance will be Nov. 15 so most likely I will, indeed, be buying stocks.

[QUOTE=Member #2041;429008]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.[/QUOTE]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.

[QUOTE=Toymann;429009]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[/QUOTE]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.