Board 8 > At this point can we all agree that Romney is our 2012 US President?

Topic List	Page List: 1, 2
User728 01/06/12 11:35:00 AM #1:	Or are people around here still clinging to false hope? <cite>User728 posted [p:636849] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Or are people around here still clinging to false hope? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SBell0105 01/06/12 11:36:00 AM #2:	Obama is still cleaning up 8 years of Republican mess. You really think there is a chance a Republican will really get elected anytime soon? -- (\__/) (='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg <cite>SBell0105 posted [p:636850] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Obama is still cleaning up 8 years of Republican mess.You really think there is a chance a Republican will really get elected anytime soon? -- (\__/)(='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
KingButz 01/06/12 11:37:00 AM #3:	Romney is not even close to guaranteed to be the POTUS. He could be, or we could get Obama again. -- My Japanese alter-ego. Hey all this is Bartz btw. <cite>KingButz posted [p:636851] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Romney is not even close to guaranteed to be the POTUS. He could be, or we could get Obama again. -- My Japanese alter-ego.Hey all this is Bartz btw. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mershaaay 01/06/12 11:38:00 AM #4:	Yes Though I'd be happier with Santorum -- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness. The Resurrection <cite>Mershaaay posted [p:636852] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> YesThough I'd be happier with Santorum -- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness.The Resurrection </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
ExThaNemesis 01/06/12 11:38:00 AM #5:	From: KingButz \| #003 He could be, or we could get Obama again. What a shocking revelation. -- http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/ExTha/10and14.jpg "What about the lion from Lion King?" - SuperNiceDog <cite>ExThaNemesis posted [p:636853] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: KingButz \| #003He could be, or we could get Obama again.What a shocking revelation. -- http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v712/ExTha/10and14.jpg"What about the lion from Lion King?" - SuperNiceDog </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:38:00 AM #6:	From: SBell0105 \| #002 Obama is still cleaning up 8 years of Republican mess. You really think there is a chance a Republican will really get elected anytime soon? Considering he is cleaning up Clinton's mess (a Democrat), yes, a Republican will get elected. Unless you think someone can just waltz into office and change the entire nation's economy instantly by snapping his fingers. And considering Obama has failed horribly at trying to fix Clinton's mess, he's on his way out. His only attempt so far was a failed stimulus package where he spent millions to research steroids in baseball and horseracing...that sure will stimulate the economy. <cite>User728 posted [p:636854] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: SBell0105 \| #002Obama is still cleaning up 8 years of Republican mess.You really think there is a chance a Republican will really get elected anytime soon?Considering he is cleaning up Clinton's mess (a Democrat), yes, a Republican will get elected. Unless you think someone can just waltz into office and change the entire nation's economy instantly by snapping his fingers. And considering Obama has failed horribly at trying to fix Clinton's mess, he's on his way out. His only attempt so far was a failed stimulus package where he spent millions to research steroids in baseball and horseracing...that sure will stimulate the economy. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JaKyL25 01/06/12 11:39:00 AM #7:	Well the inauguration isn't until 2013, so I'm gonna say no. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg <cite>JaKyL25 posted [p:636855] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Well the inauguration isn't until 2013, so I'm gonna say no. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MarvelousGerbil 01/06/12 11:40:00 AM #8:	As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos. -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif <cite>MarvelousGerbil posted [p:636856] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos. -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:40:00 AM #9:	From: Mershaaay \| #004 Yes Though I'd be happier with Santorum Santorum was my second choice all along (I hate Gingrich, Paul, and Perry...and I don't really care for Cain, Bachmann, or Huntsman). However, I like Romney better...he is a business man which should help with economic issues, and it looks like he may choose Chris Christie as his VP which would be great. <cite>User728 posted [p:636857] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: Mershaaay \| #004YesThough I'd be happier with SantorumSantorum was my second choice all along (I hate Gingrich, Paul, and Perry...and I don't really care for Cain, Bachmann, or Huntsman). However, I like Romney better...he is a business man which should help with economic issues, and it looks like he may choose Chris Christie as his VP which would be great. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
gearofages 01/06/12 11:41:00 AM #10:	Mccain in 2008 was a much stronger candidate than Romney is now, and Obama won that election in a landslide. I can't see any practical situation for a Republican to take the white house this year. -- PSN:SeaOfRage <cite>gearofages posted [p:636858] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Mccain in 2008 was a much stronger candidate than Romney is now, and Obama won that election in a landslide. I can't see any practical situation for a Republican to take the white house this year. -- PSN:SeaOfRage </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Iamdead7 01/06/12 11:41:00 AM #11:	There is no chance Obama loses to any of the current Republican contenders I'll still be voting for Rocky Anderson -- The box says "Online Gameplay not rated by ESRB", I should be able to trade my phallic named Wobbufetts to a bunch of 8 year olds. - MarvelousGerbil <cite>Iamdead7 posted [p:636859] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> There is no chance Obama loses to any of the current Republican contendersI'll still be voting for Rocky Anderson -- The box says "Online Gameplay not rated by ESRB", I should be able to trade my phallic named Wobbufetts to a bunch of 8 year olds. - MarvelousGerbil </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:42:00 AM #12:	From: MarvelousGerbil \| #008 As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos. No chance unless something huge happens this year. The independents have all left him. Hell, some Democrats have even left him. And even if people won't switch to Republican, they likely just won't show up at all this time around. <cite>User728 posted [p:636860] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: MarvelousGerbil \| #008As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos.No chance unless something huge happens this year. The independents have all left him. Hell, some Democrats have even left him. And even if people won't switch to Republican, they likely just won't show up at all this time around. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SBell0105 01/06/12 11:42:00 AM #13:	I guess you were in a coma for a majority of the 2000's. -- (\__/) (='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg <cite>SBell0105 posted [p:636861] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> I guess you were in a coma for a majority of the 2000's. -- (\__/)(='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:43:00 AM #14:	From: gearofages \| #010 Mccain in 2008 was a much stronger candidate than Romney is now, and Obama won that election in a landslide. I can't see any practical situation for a Republican to take the white house this year. Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama. <cite>User728 posted [p:636862] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: gearofages \| #010Mccain in 2008 was a much stronger candidate than Romney is now, and Obama won that election in a landslide. I can't see any practical situation for a Republican to take the white house this year.Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MarvelousGerbil 01/06/12 11:44:00 AM #15:	*User728 posted...* From: MarvelousGerbil \| #008 As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos. No chance unless something huge happens this year. The independents have all left him. Hell, some Democrats have even left him. And even if people won't switch to Republican, they likely just won't show up at all this time around. But if we don't vote for him we're racist... right? -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif <cite>MarvelousGerbil posted [p:636863] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> User728 posted...From: MarvelousGerbil \| #008As weak and unaccomplished as Obama is, he's going to remain the president for another 4 years. Alternatively, I'm voting for Kodos.No chance unless something huge happens this year. The independents have all left him. Hell, some Democrats have even left him. And even if people won't switch to Republican, they likely just won't show up at all this time around.But if we don't vote for him we're racist... right? -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:44:00 AM #16:	From: SBell0105 \| #013 I guess you were in a coma for a majority of the 2000's. I guess you don't understand that the economy cannot change overnight. People don't just walk in, make up a budget, and then the economy flips like a light switch. The status of the economy is usually a result of the actions of the President and Congress from about 8-10 years earlier. <cite>User728 posted [p:636864] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: SBell0105 \| #013I guess you were in a coma for a majority of the 2000's.I guess you don't understand that the economy cannot change overnight. People don't just walk in, make up a budget, and then the economy flips like a light switch. The status of the economy is usually a result of the actions of the President and Congress from about 8-10 years earlier. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/06/12 11:45:00 AM #17:	Yup, Obama 2008 >>> McCain 2008 = Romney 2012 > Obama 2012 -- Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick your 7 time champion, Link. <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:636865] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Yup, Obama 2008 >>> McCain 2008 = Romney 2012 > Obama 2012 -- Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pickyour 7 time champion, Link. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:45:00 AM #18:	From: MarvelousGerbil \| #015 But if we don't vote for him we're racist... right? That is the mindset of many liberals sadly. <cite>User728 posted [p:636866] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: MarvelousGerbil \| #015But if we don't vote for him we're racist... right?That is the mindset of many liberals sadly. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ace_Killjoy 01/06/12 11:45:00 AM #19:	*User728 posted...* Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama. I'm having trouble with this. Can you explain it using algebra? -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force. http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif <cite>Ace_Killjoy posted [p:636867] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> User728 posted...Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama.I'm having trouble with this.Can you explain it using algebra? -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force.http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lopen 01/06/12 11:45:00 AM #20:	Um what exactly was Clinton's mess. As far as I recall the dude was pretty solid with his foreign and economic policies. -- I tried to have a fierce rivalry with SuperNiceDog, but he made me look worse than a GameFAQs Contest! <cite>Lopen posted [p:636868] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Um what exactly was Clinton's mess. As far as I recall the dude was pretty solid with his foreign and economic policies. -- I tried to have a fierce rivalry with SuperNiceDog, but he made me look worse than a GameFAQs Contest! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
SBell0105 01/06/12 11:47:00 AM #21:	From: User728 \| #016 I guess you don't understand that the economy cannot change overnight. People don't just walk in, make up a budget, and then the economy flips like a light switch. The status of the economy is usually a result of the actions of the President and Congress from about 8-10 years earlier. You realize you are only defending Obama right now, right? -- (\__/) (='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg <cite>SBell0105 posted [p:636869] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: User728 \| #016I guess you don't understand that the economy cannot change overnight. People don't just walk in, make up a budget, and then the economy flips like a light switch. The status of the economy is usually a result of the actions of the President and Congress from about 8-10 years earlier.You realize you are only defending Obama right now, right? -- (\__/)(='.'=] < http://img.imgcake.com/sbellcardjpgub.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DeathChicken 01/06/12 11:47:00 AM #22:	Let's just ignore that Clinton was the last president to actually have a surplus (granted, he was fortunate to be in office during the dotcom boom, and before it blew up), which was promptly blown through by eight years of bloated Bush wars -- We are thought, and reality, and concept, and the unimaginable <cite>DeathChicken posted [p:636870] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Let's just ignore that Clinton was the last president to actually have a surplus (granted, he was fortunate to be in office during the dotcom boom, and before it blew up), which was promptly blown through by eight years of bloated Bush wars -- We are thought, and reality, and concept, and the unimaginable </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:47:00 AM #23:	From: Ace_Killjoy \| #019 I'm having trouble with this. Can you explain it using algebra? red sox777 already did it. But I can do it also: 2008 Obama >>>>>>>>>> 2008 McCain >> 2012 Romney >> 2012 Obama. <cite>User728 posted [p:636871] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: Ace_Killjoy \| #019I'm having trouble with this.Can you explain it using algebra?red sox777 already did it. But I can do it also: 2008 Obama >>>>>>>>>> 2008 McCain >> 2012 Romney >> 2012 Obama. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Mershaaay 01/06/12 11:48:00 AM #24:	*User728 posted...* From: Mershaaay \| #004 Yes Though I'd be happier with Santorum Santorum was my second choice all along (I hate Gingrich, Paul, and Perry...and I don't really care for Cain, Bachmann, or Huntsman). However, I like Romney better...he is a business man which should help with economic issues, and it looks like he may choose Chris Christie as his VP which would be great. Yes but Romney won't bring back DADT, which is the first step in getting our economy back on track -- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness. The Resurrection <cite>Mershaaay posted [p:636872] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> User728 posted...From: Mershaaay \| #004YesThough I'd be happier with SantorumSantorum was my second choice all along (I hate Gingrich, Paul, and Perry...and I don't really care for Cain, Bachmann, or Huntsman). However, I like Romney better...he is a business man which should help with economic issues, and it looks like he may choose Chris Christie as his VP which would be great.Yes but Romney won't bring back DADT, which is the first step in getting our economy back on track -- SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness.The Resurrection </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
MarvelousGerbil 01/06/12 11:49:00 AM #25:	*Ace_Killjoy posted...* User728 posted... Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama. I'm having trouble with this. Can you explain it using algebra? Better yet, I'll explain it with Star Wars. See, in the 70s, George Lucas was incredibly popular, moreso than "Generic Sci Fi Director". But today, George has made a lot of crappy decisions and not many good ones and a lot of people would prefer Generic Sci Fi Director over George Lucas on just about any given project. -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif <cite>MarvelousGerbil posted [p:636873] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Ace_Killjoy posted...User728 posted...Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama.I'm having trouble with this.Can you explain it using algebra?Better yet, I'll explain it with Star Wars. See, in the 70s, George Lucas was incredibly popular, moreso than "Generic Sci Fi Director". But today, George has made a lot of crappy decisions and not many good ones and a lot of people would prefer Generic Sci Fi Director over George Lucas on just about any given project. -- http://i.imgur.com/6XjQR.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
My Immortal 01/06/12 11:49:00 AM #26:	People responding seriously to User728? Shocking. -- http://www.backloggery.com/myimmortal <cite>My Immortal posted [p:636874] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> People responding seriously to User728? Shocking. -- http://www.backloggery.com/myimmortal </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
gearofages 01/06/12 11:49:00 AM #27:	From: User728 \| #014 Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama. He dominated the minority vote in 2008; there is no reason to think that he won't do that again, this time against whatever candidate staggers out of the Republican primary. No one is going to be able to compete with $750,000,000 and 90+% of the black vote. The people at Fox News are the only ones that honestly think that Obama has a chance of losing. -- PSN:SeaOfRage <cite>gearofages posted [p:636875] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: User728 \| #014Obama in 2008 was an astronomically stronger candidate than Obama is currently. Romney is a mild decrease from 2008 McCain. 2012 Obama is an enormous decrease from 2008 Obama.He dominated the minority vote in 2008; there is no reason to think that he won't do that again, this time against whatever candidate staggers out of the Republican primary. No one is going to be able to compete with $750,000,000 and 90+% of the black vote. The people at Fox News are the only ones that honestly think that Obama has a chance of losing. -- PSN:SeaOfRage </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:49:00 AM #28:	From: SBell0105 \| #021 You realize you are only defending Obama right now, right? And attacking Clinton at the same time. I understand that we won't see the results of Obama's efforts until next term or the term after. However, he, like Bush, is unlucky to be in office at the wrong time. Plus, his stimulus package threw millions at different things that have zero effect on the economy (steroid investigation in baseball and horse racing for example). So even though we may not see the results of his efforts for several years, things sure aren't looking good based on his crappy idea. And as I said before, even if he had a good idea...he is in office at the wrong time just like Bush. <cite>User728 posted [p:636876] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: SBell0105 \| #021You realize you are only defending Obama right now, right?And attacking Clinton at the same time. I understand that we won't see the results of Obama's efforts until next term or the term after. However, he, like Bush, is unlucky to be in office at the wrong time. Plus, his stimulus package threw millions at different things that have zero effect on the economy (steroid investigation in baseball and horse racing for example). So even though we may not see the results of his efforts for several years, things sure aren't looking good based on his crappy idea. And as I said before, even if he had a good idea...he is in office at the wrong time just like Bush. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ace_Killjoy 01/06/12 11:50:00 AM #29:	*User728 posted...* red sox777 already did it. But I can do it also: 2008 Obama >>>>>>>>>> 2008 McCain >> 2012 Romney >> 2012 Obama. I noticed that after I posted. -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force. http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif <cite>Ace_Killjoy posted [p:636877] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> User728 posted...red sox777 already did it. But I can do it also: 2008 Obama >>>>>>>>>> 2008 McCain >> 2012 Romney >> 2012 Obama.I noticed that after I posted. -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force.http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JDTAY 01/06/12 11:50:00 AM #30:	I think this race could go either way, though it doesn't really matter. Obama can't do anything without getting the House back, and the Republicans just redrew all the districts to favor themselves. I'd feel pretty good right now if I didn't know deep down that the Republicans aren't actually going to make any significant spending cuts. I want a third party, darnit. >_< -- PSN: JDTAY87 <cite>JDTAY posted [p:636878] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> I think this race could go either way, though it doesn't really matter. Obama can't do anything without getting the House back, and the Republicans just redrew all the districts to favor themselves. I'd feel pretty good right now if I didn't know deep down that the Republicans aren't actually going to make any significant spending cuts. I want a third party, darnit. >_< -- PSN: JDTAY87 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:51:00 AM #31:	From: DeathChicken \| #022 Let's just ignore that Clinton was the last president to actually have a surplus (granted, he was fortunate to be in office during the dotcom boom, and before it blew up), which was promptly blown through by eight years of bloated Bush wars Just an example of a president being in office at the right time. <cite>User728 posted [p:636879] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: DeathChicken \| #022Let's just ignore that Clinton was the last president to actually have a surplus (granted, he was fortunate to be in office during the dotcom boom, and before it blew up), which was promptly blown through by eight years of bloated Bush warsJust an example of a president being in office at the right time. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
red sox 777 01/06/12 11:51:00 AM #32:	John Kerry dominated the minority vote too. But you can't win the election by winning the minority, you have to win the majority. Which is why elections are decided by what percentage of the majority group each side gets. -- Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pick your 7 time champion, Link. <cite>red sox 777 posted [p:636880] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> John Kerry dominated the minority vote too. But you can't win the election by winning the minority, you have to win the majority. Which is why elections are decided by what percentage of the majority group each side gets. -- Congratulations to SuperNiceDog, Guru Winner, who was smart enough to pickyour 7 time champion, Link. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Ace_Killjoy 01/06/12 11:52:00 AM #33:	*MarvelousGerbil posted...* Better yet, I'll explain it with Star Wars. See, in the 70s, George Lucas was incredibly popular, moreso than "Generic Sci Fi Director". But today, George has made a lot of crappy decisions and not many good ones and a lot of people would prefer Generic Sci Fi Director over George Lucas on just about any given project. Ok. That works too. -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force. http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif <cite>Ace_Killjoy posted [p:636881] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> MarvelousGerbil posted...Better yet, I'll explain it with Star Wars. See, in the 70s, George Lucas was incredibly popular, moreso than "Generic Sci Fi Director". But today, George has made a lot of crappy decisions and not many good ones and a lot of people would prefer Generic Sci Fi Director over George Lucas on just about any given project.Ok. That works too. -- Proud member of the Global Defence Force.http://gifninja.com/animatedgifs/120003/phoenixtrio.gif </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
kevwaffles 01/06/12 11:52:00 AM #34:	From: User728 \| #018 That is the mindset of many liberals sadly. As anti-main parties as I am, I have literally never heard a liberal make that claim. There was a ton of speculation that Obama was polling higher in 2008 for the reason that people didn't want to seem racist, but it wasn't liberals saying that. Also, it didn't pan out, but that's neither here nor there. -- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land." -Toad, SMB3 <cite>kevwaffles posted [p:636882] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: User728 \| #018That is the mindset of many liberals sadly.As anti-main parties as I am, I have literally never heard a liberal make that claim. There was a ton of speculation that Obama was polling higher in 2008 for the reason that people didn't want to seem racist, but it wasn't liberals saying that. Also, it didn't pan out, but that's neither here nor there. -- "One toot on this whistle will take you to a far away land."-Toad, SMB3 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Lopen 01/06/12 11:53:00 AM #35:	I'm still curious what Clinton's mess was that W had to clean up. Claim he was lucky to be in office at the right time if you want, not sure I buy it, but for the sake of argument claim that was the only reason the guy ran a surplus-- what did he actually do that became seriously problematic to the point that it needed to be "cleaned up" -- I tried to have a fierce rivalry with SuperNiceDog, but he made me look worse than a GameFAQs Contest! <cite>Lopen posted [p:636883] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> I'm still curious what Clinton's mess was that W had to clean up. Claim he was lucky to be in office at the right time if you want, not sure I buy it, but for the sake of argument claim that was the only reason the guy ran a surplus-- what did he actually do that became seriously problematic to the point that it needed to be "cleaned up" -- I tried to have a fierce rivalry with SuperNiceDog, but he made me look worse than a GameFAQs Contest! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:54:00 AM #36:	From: gearofages \| #027 He dominated the minority vote in 2008; there is no reason to think that he won't do that again, this time against whatever candidate staggers out of the Republican primary. No one is going to be able to compete with $750,000,000 and 90+% of the black vote. The people at Fox News are the only ones that honestly think that Obama has a chance of losing. Actually, there are many reasons to think he won't do it again. He virtually lost the middle votes. Many of his former supporters won't show up again. He has done a lousy job and so it won't happen again. Also, the black vote isn't much different than it was when Bush was in office so that isn't even the relevant factor. As for the Fox News jab, most pollsters seem to be giving it to the Republicans at this point. Here is a link of all the popular pollsters combined into one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_president_obama_vs_republican_candidate-1745.html Notice how Fox isn't even on the list unless you scroll down to 5/5-5/6...and they said it was a tie back then. Nice try though! <cite>User728 posted [p:636884] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: gearofages \| #027He dominated the minority vote in 2008; there is no reason to think that he won't do that again, this time against whatever candidate staggers out of the Republican primary. No one is going to be able to compete with $750,000,000 and 90+% of the black vote. The people at Fox News are the only ones that honestly think that Obama has a chance of losing.Actually, there are many reasons to think he won't do it again. He virtually lost the middle votes. Many of his former supporters won't show up again. He has done a lousy job and so it won't happen again. Also, the black vote isn't much different than it was when Bush was in office so that isn't even the relevant factor. As for the Fox News jab, most pollsters seem to be giving it to the Republicans at this point. Here is a link of all the popular pollsters combined into one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_president_obama_vs_republican_candidate-1745.htmlNotice how Fox isn't even on the list unless you scroll down to 5/5-5/6...and they said it was a tie back then. Nice try though! </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 11:56:00 AM #37:	From: Lopen \| #035 I'm still curious what Clinton's mess was that W had to clean up. Claim he was lucky to be in office at the right time if you want, not sure I buy it, but for the sake of argument claim that was the only reason the guy ran a surplus-- what did he actually do that became seriously problematic to the point that it needed to be "cleaned up" Look at how crappy the economy was when Bush was in office. Since someone can't just change the economy over night, you have to assume the guy who was making the budgets before him had to have screwed up somewhere and left a huge mess for the new unfortunate guy. <cite>User728 posted [p:636885] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: Lopen \| #035I'm still curious what Clinton's mess was that W had to clean up. Claim he was lucky to be in office at the right time if you want, not sure I buy it, but for the sake of argument claim that was the only reason the guy ran a surplus-- what did he actually do that became seriously problematic to the point that it needed to be "cleaned up"Look at how crappy the economy was when Bush was in office. Since someone can't just change the economy over night, you have to assume the guy who was making the budgets before him had to have screwed up somewhere and left a huge mess for the new unfortunate guy. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
DeathChicken 01/06/12 11:58:00 AM #38:	Either that, or you know...wasting money for eight years on wars that were arranged so money only funneled straight into Haliburton -- We are thought, and reality, and concept, and the unimaginable <cite>DeathChicken posted [p:636886] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Either that, or you know...wasting money for eight years on wars that were arranged so money only funneled straight into Haliburton -- We are thought, and reality, and concept, and the unimaginable </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
EndOfDiscOne 01/06/12 11:59:00 AM #39:	Clinton is reponsible for the housing market crash. He made it easy for everyone to get mortgages then they all went and defaulted on them. -- http://img.imgcake.com/fitgirljpgta.jpg <cite>EndOfDiscOne posted [p:636887] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Clinton is reponsible for the housing market crash. He made it easy for everyone to get mortgages then they all went and defaulted on them. -- http://img.imgcake.com/fitgirljpgta.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:02:00 PM #40:	From: EndOfDiscOne \| #039 Clinton is reponsible for the housing market crash. He made it easy for everyone to get mortgages then they all went and defaulted on them. This is true too. The Community Reinvestment Act killed the house market for sure. Obama was actually involved in that even though he wasn't a big name back then. Clinton was a big part of this by allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to fulfill their affordable mortgage purchase requirements by purchasing subprime loans that were granted to low income borrowers. That was a crisis in itself. <cite>User728 posted [p:636888] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: EndOfDiscOne \| #039Clinton is reponsible for the housing market crash. He made it easy for everyone to get mortgages then they all went and defaulted on them.This is true too. The Community Reinvestment Act killed the house market for sure. Obama was actually involved in that even though he wasn't a big name back then. Clinton was a big part of this by allowing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to fulfill their affordable mortgage purchase requirements by purchasing subprime loans that were granted to low income borrowers. That was a crisis in itself. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:03:00 PM #41:	From: DeathChicken \| #038 Either that, or you know...wasting money for eight years on wars that were arranged so money only funneled straight into Haliburton And how does that explain the economy being horrible at the very beginning of the war? <cite>User728 posted [p:636889] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: DeathChicken \| #038Either that, or you know...wasting money for eight years on wars that were arranged so money only funneled straight into HaliburtonAnd how does that explain the economy being horrible at the very beginning of the war? </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JaKyL25 01/06/12 12:05:00 PM #42:	From: User728 \| #036 As for the Fox News jab, most pollsters seem to be giving it to the Republicans at this point. Here is a link of all the popular pollsters combined into one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_president_obama_vs_republican_candidate-1745.html How about this, more relevant data: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html Looks like a tossup to me with Obama needing to pick up fewer states than Republican X. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg <cite>JaKyL25 posted [p:636890] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: User728 \| #036As for the Fox News jab, most pollsters seem to be giving it to the Republicans at this point. Here is a link of all the popular pollsters combined into one: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_president_obama_vs_republican_candidate-1745.htmlHow about this, more relevant data:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.htmlLooks like a tossup to me with Obama needing to pick up fewer states than Republican X. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JDTAY 01/06/12 12:06:00 PM #43:	The economy actually did pretty well during the war, up until the housing bubble burst. Which I do partially blame Bush for. >_< -- PSN: JDTAY87 <cite>JDTAY posted [p:636891] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> The economy actually did pretty well during the war, up until the housing bubble burst. Which I do partially blame Bush for. >_< -- PSN: JDTAY87 </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Iamdead7 01/06/12 12:06:00 PM #44:	using the results of a poll with Obama vs a "generic Republican" is quite possibly the stupidest thing you could possibly do Generics always poll higher because people will just project what they want onto one and ignore anything bad. All of the republicans are terrible terrible candidates so it really doesn't matter how well a generic republican does -- Coincidence that a self-avowed Communist is so against democracy and traditional marriage? - SephG after misquoting me hilariously <cite>Iamdead7 posted [p:636892] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> using the results of a poll with Obama vs a "generic Republican" is quite possibly the stupidest thing you could possibly doGenerics always poll higher because people will just project what they want onto one and ignore anything bad. All of the republicans are terrible terrible candidates so it really doesn't matter how well a generic republican does -- Coincidence that a self-avowed Communist is so against democracy and traditional marriage? - SephG after misquoting me hilariously </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:07:00 PM #45:	From: JaKyL25 \| #042 How about this, more relevant data: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.html Looks like a tossup to me with Obama needing to pick up fewer states than Republican X. Problem with that link is that it only tells us about partisan lines...doesn't tell us about the individual candidates themselves. Just because a state is usually more liberal, doesn't mean the specific candidate (crappy 2012 Obama) will take the state. Also, Obama just needs to lose 1 big state, such as Florida, and then it's pretty much over for him. <cite>User728 posted [p:636893] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: JaKyL25 \| #042How about this, more relevant data:http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/2012_elections_electoral_college_map.htmlLooks like a tossup to me with Obama needing to pick up fewer states than Republican X.Problem with that link is that it only tells us about partisan lines...doesn't tell us about the individual candidates themselves. Just because a state is usually more liberal, doesn't mean the specific candidate (crappy 2012 Obama) will take the state. Also, Obama just needs to lose 1 big state, such as Florida, and then it's pretty much over for him. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:08:00 PM #46:	From: JDTAY \| #043 The economy actually did pretty well during the war, up until the housing bubble burst. Which I do partially blame Bush for. >_< How could you blame Bush for it when the mess started years before he was even president? Clinton is to blame...especially his HUD. And Obama was actually a lawyer in a huge case which caused housing disasters too. Bush had nothing to do with the housing market. <cite>User728 posted [p:636894] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: JDTAY \| #043The economy actually did pretty well during the war, up until the housing bubble burst. Which I do partially blame Bush for. >_<How could you blame Bush for it when the mess started years before he was even president? Clinton is to blame...especially his HUD. And Obama was actually a lawyer in a huge case which caused housing disasters too. Bush had nothing to do with the housing market. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:09:00 PM #47:	From: Iamdead7 \| #044 using the results of a poll with Obama vs a "generic Republican" is quite possibly the stupidest thing you could possibly do Generics always poll higher because people will just project what they want onto one and ignore anything bad. All of the republicans are terrible terrible candidates so it really doesn't matter how well a generic republican does It's more telling of how awful Obama is now and how his popularity is dead. <cite>User728 posted [p:636895] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: Iamdead7 \| #044using the results of a poll with Obama vs a "generic Republican" is quite possibly the stupidest thing you could possibly doGenerics always poll higher because people will just project what they want onto one and ignore anything bad. All of the republicans are terrible terrible candidates so it really doesn't matter how well a generic republican doesIt's more telling of how awful Obama is now and how his popularity is dead. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
special_sauce 01/06/12 12:09:00 PM #48:	Why are your topics all questions where you want us to "admit" that pokemon is childish or "agree" that Romney is the president. Are you looking for some sort of unanimous confirmation of what you think or something? and if we disagree we're: "clinging to false hope" "Peter Pan syndrom" (clinging to childhood) Anyway. I don't think Romney is POTUS. Obama is going to win. Every President in the last 40 years (not sure about exact number) has lost party seats in Congress at the midterms, and most of them got reelected. Romney is a "liar." Santorum and Perry are "nutjobs." Paul's old. Gingrich is a toad. I'm saying this as a diehard Ron Paul man -- Me_Pie_Three wants a SuperNiceDog for Christmas <cite>special_sauce posted [p:636896] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> Why are your topics all questions where you want us to "admit" that pokemon is childish or "agree" that Romney is the president. Are you looking for some sort of unanimous confirmation of what you think or something?and if we disagree we're:"clinging to false hope""Peter Pan syndrom" (clinging to childhood)Anyway. I don't think Romney is POTUS. Obama is going to win. Every President in the last 40 years (not sure about exact number) has lost party seats in Congress at the midterms, and most of them got reelected. Romney is a "liar." Santorum and Perry are "nutjobs." Paul's old. Gingrich is a toad.I'm saying this as a diehard Ron Paul man -- Me_Pie_Three wants a SuperNiceDog for Christmas </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
JaKyL25 01/06/12 12:09:00 PM #49:	From: User728 \| #045 Problem with that link is that it only tells us about partisan lines...doesn't tell us about the individual candidates themselves. Just because a state is usually more liberal, doesn't mean the specific candidate (crappy 2012 Obama) will take the state. Also, Obama just needs to lose 1 big state, such as Florida, and then it's pretty much over for him. It quite literally says that the blue states are for "Obama," not just "for Democrat." And your math is quite horrid. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg <cite>JaKyL25 posted [p:636897] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: User728 \| #045Problem with that link is that it only tells us about partisan lines...doesn't tell us about the individual candidates themselves. Just because a state is usually more liberal, doesn't mean the specific candidate (crappy 2012 Obama) will take the state. Also, Obama just needs to lose 1 big state, such as Florida, and then it's pretty much over for him.It quite literally says that the blue states are for "Obama," not just "for Democrat."And your math is quite horrid. -- Thank you, Eddie Guerrero.http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
User728 01/06/12 12:13:00 PM #50:	From: special_sauce \| #048 Why are your topics all questions where you want us to "admit" that pokemon is childish or "agree" that Romney is the president. Are you looking for some sort of unanimous confirmation of what you think or something? and if we disagree we're: "clinging to false hope" "Peter Pan syndrom" (clinging to childhood) Anyway. I don't think Romney is POTUS. Obama is going to win. Every President in the last 40 years (not sure about exact number) has lost party seats in Congress at the midterms, and most of them got reelected. Romney is a "liar." Santorum and Perry are "nutjobs." Paul's old. Gingrich is a toad. I'm saying this as a diehard Ron Paul man Your post lost its credibility. From: JaKyL25 \| #049 It quite literally says that the blue states are for "Obama," not just "for Democrat." And your math is quite horrid. I know that is says Obama, but they're basing it off of liberal states, not states that Obama personally is popular in. And my math is just fine, thank you. <cite>User728 posted [p:636898] in At this po... [t:61578447]...</cite> <quote> From: special_sauce \| #048Why are your topics all questions where you want us to "admit" that pokemon is childish or "agree" that Romney is the president. Are you looking for some sort of unanimous confirmation of what you think or something?and if we disagree we're:"clinging to false hope""Peter Pan syndrom" (clinging to childhood)Anyway. I don't think Romney is POTUS. Obama is going to win. Every President in the last 40 years (not sure about exact number) has lost party seats in Congress at the midterms, and most of them got reelected. Romney is a "liar." Santorum and Perry are "nutjobs." Paul's old. Gingrich is a toad.I'm saying this as a diehard Ron Paul manYour post lost its credibility.From: JaKyL25 \| #049It quite literally says that the blue states are for "Obama," not just "for Democrat."And your math is quite horrid.I know that is says Obama, but they're basing it off of liberal states, not states that Obama personally is popular in. And my math is just fine, thank you. </quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1, 2

Board 8 > At this point can we all agree that Romney is our 2012 US President? (+) Yeah! (+)

Board 8 > At this point can we all agree that Romney is our 2012 US President?