I think Bush spent more time on vacation than any president in history. Just sayin.... I don't judge a politician on superficial characteristics and try and extrapolate some kind of notion of contempt for america from a guy who wants to be president. I mean that's just a crazy stretch. I usually judge them based on what they want to do, and whether it will benefit me. I think Romney would fuck me over, I think Obama would fuck me over less. Saying that the guy has contempt for America because he has respect for other nations is absurd. You simply have to know that. There's no way I'm going to even humor that notion beyond this.
No Lenny about small groups of people having disproportionate amounts of influence in a democracy because of leverage that they hold in the private sector. Are you intentionally missing the point or are you just really high?
Romney couldn't have won without Ohio and a good handful of other states, which is what makes it not suspicious, unless you intend to argue that Obama rigged all the swing states except North Carolina.
I have already responded to that question. I'm against corporate influence in politics, corporations buying off politicians and elections, politicians working for big business instead of for the people, I'm against all that.
do u think we live in democracy? is there anywhere on the planet that is truly free? did u pay your taxes? there is a small group.
I support the separation of everything and state. The biggest governments should be small with very limited powers and and kept barely funded. We the people established a government but then that government created and defined the citizen so who created who? We are seen by both parties as demographics and human resources who must be fleeced, kept in the dark; controlled and heavily regulated.
Mrgoodsmoke I dont see a single person here defending Romney. I think its common knowledge that the guy is a joke...just like Obama...
So if you think that influence should be spread evenly among the people of a democracy, then it should follow that you disagree with Romney's "outspend em 4 times over to try and buy the election" strategy......right?
Yeah and one is openly saying he'll care for those in need and the other is saying that he's not concerned about em, so from behind my veil of ignorance, I vote for the guy who wants to raise the lowest rung of the ladder. This is classical stuff here.
oramney would have been no different then this guy.. They are the same, To try and say they are not is laughable at best... two sides of the same coin..
Nope I don't have to argue that Obama rigged all the swing states. If you remember before the election Ohio was the swing state, and most predicted Ohio to be the one to declare the next president. Follow what I'm saying?
FactCheck.org : Does Tagg Romney ‘Own' Ohio Voting Machines? Just another Republican fuck up, they bought the wrong machines! It must have been some clever skullduggery down at the boneyard!
Lbs, look at the total difference between electoral votes received by each candidate. Now look at how many came from Ohio to Obama. Now subtract that number from Obama's total and add it to Romney's total. If Obama still has the most votes, then the issue is moot.
Yeah, I'm against that, and pretty much every thing else Romney said and stood for. That's why I didn't vote for him, nor have I ever voted for a Republican ever in any election, federal, state, and local.
No your totally wrong man, it doesn't matter that romney lost all the other swing states if anyone would "rig" the election it would be in Ohio. Obama didn't care 2 shits about any other state but Ohio .
No. He wants to keep the Bush tax cuts for everyone except the top earners, the people who are too far from suffering to suffer from an increase in taxes, and the ones who are profiting off the laboring class. The republicans and the tea party are the ones who refused to negotiate unless the rich could keep getting richer, so Obama will probably let the tax cuts expire. Private investment has enjoyed a low tax rate for a long time, and they've failed to create jobs or stimulate anything, now this election cycle, they blame the govt. Don't try and call the expiration of the Bush tax cuts a tax hike on Obama's part. That's just false and you know it. The republicans had a chance to help the poor and middle class and compromise, and they held out insisting that if the rich pay more then everyone should pay more. And they lost. The point is that if you raise taxes on everyone, you take food from some people, and from others you just take 1% of their savings that they've been hiding overseas. The effect is dramatically different on the two different people and the implications of how you make that decision on who's taxes to raise is directly connected to the degree of humanitarianism that you hold yourself to.
I'm 43 years old and I've noticed that in the weeks following a presidential election there are scores of news stories around the nation about voting machines being discovered in abandoned warehouses and car trunks full of used punch cards being found. Somehow the mainstream media never seems to connect those dots once the ticker tape falls. The people who run the local precincts know how to manufacture or disqualify votes. I'd say they are pretty damn good at it.
He didn't have to because Romney practically campaigned against himself. The tea party people are proof that a vocal minority can't take control. You're saying Obama only cared about winning Ohio, but it's unlikely that he did that well there legitimately? Even though he won by a landslide and won all the other swing states too? It's really sad when you encounter people who can't accept defeat. It's just messy and ugly and weird.