Brown wins - many will lose!

PostmodernProphet said:
every month that goes by it seems to look better and better......
Click to expand...

So you want a return to an Executive Branch consolidating of power, invading a country based on lies, using taxpayers money to bail out banks and Wall St., outing of CIA agents to punish those not in line with the PNAC, lies and scare tactics to initiate laws that subvert the Constitution, etc., etc.

Hell man, being stubborn is one thing, being stupid is another, and being a fascist is just not acceptable.
 
Taichiliberal said:
What news report? When was that report made in relation to the article I posted? Surely in the same time it took you to respond to both of my posts you could have easily googled proof of what you say?
Click to expand...

don't be an idiot.....you can google as well as I can, here's a variety of headlines...
Strong Voter Turnout Reported in Key Senate Race in Massachusetts
Massachusetts senate race update: Big voter turnout at polls
Early reports: Heavy voter turnout in Massachusetts
Massachusetts Voter Turnout Double for Senate Special Election
Turnout Strong for Massachusetts Election
Voter turnout is heavy for the special election to fill the state's ... race for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts sparked a huge voter turnout, ...
Election officials in Massachusetts reported heavy turnout as voters

and that's just from the first page of google results....
voter turnout Massachusetts election - Google Search
 
Taichiliberal said:
So you want a return to an Executive Branch consolidating of power, invading a country based on lies, using taxpayers money to bail out banks and Wall St., outing of CIA agents to punish those not in line with the PNAC, lies and scare tactics to initiate laws that subvert the Constitution, etc., etc.

Hell man, being stubborn is one thing, being stupid is another, and being a fascist is just not acceptable.
Click to expand...

yes....and as horrifying as you make it sound, I am not alone...

Perhaps the greatest measure of Obama's declining support is that just 50% of voters now say they prefer having him as President to George W. Bush, with 44% saying they'd rather have his predecessor. Given the horrendous approval ratings Bush showed during his final term that's somewhat of a surprise and an indication that voters are increasingly placing the blame on Obama for the country's difficulties instead of giving him space because of the tough situation he inherited.
Click to expand...

isn't it ironic that more and more people are wishing there were 'mulligans' for 2009.....

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-december-standing.html
 
Last edited:
I'm just a jealous old hag who for some reason thinks other people care what I think. I need a turkey baster full of hormones shoved up my smelly wrinkled old twat.

__________________
Michelle Antoinette's attitude of "Let them eat cake".
Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus Obama's plan - penis et circenses (bread and circuses)
Obama's promise of "Rope and chains"


The rest of the world -------> :1up: <------- Timmie

'Leftist intellectuals believe passion reflects greater reasoning'
'You've got to stand for something, or you will fall for anything'
FREEDOM IS NOT FREE
:usflag:​
 
PostmodernProphet said:
don't be an idiot.....you can google as well as I can, here's a variety of headlines...
Strong Voter Turnout Reported in Key Senate Race in Massachusetts
Massachusetts senate race update: Big voter turnout at polls
Early reports: Heavy voter turnout in Massachusetts
Massachusetts Voter Turnout Double for Senate Special Election
Turnout Strong for Massachusetts Election
Voter turnout is heavy for the special election to fill the state's ... race for U.S. Senate in Massachusetts sparked a huge voter turnout, ...
Election officials in Massachusetts reported heavy turnout as voters

and that's just from the first page of google results....
voter turnout Massachusetts election - Google Search
Click to expand...

Don't get pissy now! YOU make a statement in the last post the implies that returning to the neocon nonsense of the Shrub's reign of error is preferable. I just point out that's a stupid idea, unless you personally benefitted from the last 8 years. Then you IGNORE my link in favor of this lame ass "well, it's all over google". Newsflash for ya kid, I found my article and gave you just ONE example of via a google search. Here another example, which says Brown would have won even if there were full voter turn out....but acknowledge that voter turnout was lacking:

http://cocreateumbc.blogspot.com/2010/01/massachusetts-senate-outcome-driven.html

My point is that a combination of switch over votes protesting either Obama or local Mass. political corruption in the Dem party plus registered voters NOT voting in protest or whatever put Brown in. There is evidence that suggests a low voter turnout......If you can find the actual numbers of registered voters and how many actually voted, let me know...because slogging through google can be time consuming if you don't hit on the proper search words.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
yes....and as horrifying as you make it sound, I am not alone...



isn't it ironic that more and more people are wishing there were 'mulligans' for 2009.....

http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-december-standing.html
Click to expand...

All you've shown is a drop in the polls. BFD......his numbers are STILL better than the average of the Shrub's 8 years. And I would REALLY like to see how the "impeachment" question wormed it's way into the poll? What the fuck was the impetus for that?

Bottom line: Obama is a disappointment for a lot of people because he and the Dems are NOT acknowledging in words or actions that they're dealing with people who are NOt about compromise....period.

Here's a question for that poll...."Do you realize that it was the Shrub & company who created the Wall St./bank bail out with your money.....and lied to you about invading Iraq......and sent your sons & daughters ill equipped and many not properly trained to Iraq...and created a back-door draft and then tried to stiff the vets on benefits....and road blocked investigations into corrupt contractors?"

Is THAT what they want to go back to?
 
Taichiliberal said:
Don't get pissy now! YOU make a statement in the last post the implies that returning to the neocon nonsense of the Shrub's reign of error is preferable. I just point out that's a stupid idea, unless you personally benefitted from the last 8 years. Then you IGNORE my link in favor of this lame ass "well, it's all over google". Newsflash for ya kid, I found my article and gave you just ONE example of via a google search. Here another example, which says Brown would have won even if there were full voter turn out....but acknowledge that voter turnout was lacking:

http://cocreateumbc.blogspot.com/2010/01/massachusetts-senate-outcome-driven.html

My point is that a combination of switch over votes protesting either Obama or local Mass. political corruption in the Dem party plus registered voters NOT voting in protest or whatever put Brown in. There is evidence that suggests a low voter turnout......If you can find the actual numbers of registered voters and how many actually voted, let me know...because slogging through google can be time consuming if you don't hit on the proper search words.
Click to expand...

I'm not getting pissy, I'm getting pedantic.....I am teaching you the error of your ways.....it is better to look at the facts than it is to dream the fanatic's dream.....you can pretend all you want that Brown won because voters didn't turn out.....the reality is, Brown won because record numbers of voters DID.....true, suck ass liberals who wanted Coakley as their senator didn't show up.....either because they didn't exist or because they were disheartened by her campaign......but, more people voted in Massachusetts than normally vote in Massachusetts.....perhaps that's what having choices does to an electorate......hope and change, Touchie, hope and change......
 
Taichiliberal said:
And I would REALLY like to see how the "impeachment" question wormed it's way into the poll? What the fuck was the impetus for that?
Click to expand...
impeachment would be mulligans for 2008.......
Is THAT what they want to go back to?
Click to expand...
how about going back to the day before we spent a trillion dollars on nothing......how about going back to the day before we spent a year debating a health care reform bill that turned into nothing.....
 
I suspect this sounds counterintutitive to many but I belive that the Brown win makes an Obama reelection more likely and thus, in the long run, will be better for America.

Recient history shows us that the worse the midterm elections are for the party in the white house the better the presidents reelection landslide two years later.

I had hoped we would get real healthcare reform, but we will get some small steps accomplished and maybe a less dramatic shift is better for the nation.

The hatred that is out there for President Obama, but was not for President Bush astonishes me. President Obama has not sent Americans heros to start a war of agression that would kill thousands of innocent American heros. President Obama has presided over the leveling off of the worse decline in the American Economy in generations and has cemented plans to end both of Bush's huge forign policy disasters..

Where is the hate coming from? Sure I wish the economy were better, but to blame it all on the Current President is silly and childish.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
I'm not getting pissy, I'm getting pedantic.....I am teaching you the error of your ways.....it is better to look at the facts than it is to dream the fanatic's dream.....you can pretend all you want that Brown won because voters didn't turn out.....the reality is, Brown won because record numbers of voters DID.....true, suck ass liberals who wanted Coakley as their senator didn't show up.....either because they didn't exist or because they were disheartened by her campaign......but, more people voted in Massachusetts than normally vote in Massachusetts.....perhaps that's what having choices does to an electorate......hope and change, Touchie, hope and change......
Click to expand...

An interesting exchange...follow along the pertinent posts...

Post 107 and 108 should reveal both posters claims
Post 122 and 125...the evidence...

TC PWNed...down for the count

and as he so elegently states....

he is....." a true coward unable to admit he's wrong on any level."

Nice job PMP...:good4u:
 
Jarod said:
The hatred that is out there for President Obama, but was not for President Bush astonishes me. President Obama has not sent Americans heros to start a war of agression that would kill thousands of innocent American heros. President Obama has presided over the leveling off of the worse decline in the American Economy in generations and has cemented plans to end both of Bush's huge forign policy disasters..

Where is the hate coming from? Sure I wish the economy were better, but to blame it all on the Current President is silly and childish.
Click to expand...

I must address this. There are always going to be those on the edges (left and right) that "blame" the president for everything that goes wrong in their term of office no matter if the president can conceivably do something about it or not. It has always been that way. Look at the "hate" that certain segments of society had for President Clinton...a moderate president IMO. I agree there is a standard of "hate" for President Obama out there right now, but to say that there wasn't the same (or more) of a level of hate for Bush during his presidency is to have washed away the past 9 years from your mind or to say that during that time you have had your head in the political sand.
 
Jarod said:
I suspect this sounds counterintutitive to many but I belive that the Brown win makes an Obama reelection more likely and thus, in the long run, will be better for America.

Recient history shows us that the worse the midterm elections are for the party in the white house the better the presidents reelection landslide two years later.

I had hoped we would get real healthcare reform, but we will get some small steps accomplished and maybe a less dramatic shift is better for the nation.

The hatred that is out there for President Obama, but was not for President Bush astonishes me. President Obama has not sent Americans heros to start a war of agression that would kill thousands of innocent American heros. President Obama has presided over the leveling off of the worse decline in the American Economy in generations and has cemented plans to end both of Bush's huge forign policy disasters..

Where is the hate coming from? Sure I wish the economy were better, but to blame it all on the Current President is silly and childish.
Click to expand...

This entire post is astonishing...Browns election makes Obamas re-election more likely....thats not counter-intuitive..thats freekin insane...

we haven't had "mid-term" elections yet...

"We will get small-step improvements in healthcare? Thats exactly what the Republicans have been wanting since day one...no government take over of healthcare, just address the specific problems and correct them, one by one..

Hatred for Obama??/ what bullshit...Hatred for this President is almost non-existent...the majority of citizens don't like his actions and the Democrats socialistic power grab, but personally, I'd say hes is quite well liked.....

Claim hatred for Obama exists and then you go on to practically claim Bush was the devil incarnate....thats telling isn't .??

You need to step back and re-evaluate your beliefs....
 
Last edited:
leaningright said:
I must address this. There are always going to be those on the edges (left and right) that "blame" the president for everything that goes wrong in their term of office no matter if the president can conceivably do something about it or not. It has always been that way. Look at the "hate" that certain segments of society had for President Clinton...a moderate president IMO. I agree there is a standard of "hate" for President Obama out there right now, but to say that there wasn't the same (or more) of a level of hate for Bush during his presidency is to have washed away the past 9 years from your mind or to say that during that time you have had your head in the political sand.
Click to expand...

I agree that in the end the dislike for Bush was strong even boarding on hatred, but... for the first 6 years they LOVED him nation destroying lie after lie!

President Obama is attacked daily by Rush, Hannity, Beck and the like... Harsh angery attacks that are not related to reality one bit. The Republicans have launched a destroy mission like they tried with President Clinton, the difference is that Presidnet Obama does not have a messy personal life so policy must suffer instead.

I am starting to belive that when we have Democratic presidents we should only elect those with a messy private life to give the Republicans something to focus on other than obstructing any attempt at improving the economy.
 
bravo said:
This entire post is astonishing...Browns election makes Obamas re-election more likely....thats not counter-intuitive..thats freekin insane...

we haven't had "mid-term" elections yet...

"We will get small-step improvements in healthcare? Thats exactly what the Republicans have been wanting since day one...no government take over of healthcare, just address the specific problems and correct them, one by one..

Hatred for Obama??/ what bullshit...Hatred for this President is almost non-existent...the majority of citizens don't like his actions and the Democrats socialistic power grab, but personally, I'd say hes is quite well liked.....

Claim hatred for Obama exists and then you go on to practically claim Bush was the devil incarnate....thats telling isn't .??

You need to step back and re-evaluate your beliefs....
Click to expand...

The Democrats were ELECTED so how can you call using that power a power grab? You can call it socialist, I know thats the Rush talking point, all you want, but that is not what it is!
 
Jarod said:
I agree that in the end the dislike for Bush was strong even boarding on hatred, but... for the first 6 years they LOVED him nation destroying lie after lie!

President Obama is attacked daily by Rush, Hannity, Beck and the like... Harsh angery attacks that are not related to reality one bit. The Republicans have launched a destroy mission like they tried with President Clinton, the difference is that Presidnet Obama does not have a messy personal life so policy must suffer instead.

I am starting to belive that when we have Democratic presidents we should only elect those with a messy private life to give the Republicans something to focus on other than obstructing any attempt at improving the economy.
Click to expand...

Well, it was earlier than "in the end" for the one's whose job it was to "hate" Bush. That is really the key...the one's whose job it was. People like Olberman, Franken, Madcow and other left leaning politicos hated him from the start, as we should expect. Just like you should expect people like you named (Rush, Hannity, Beck...) to hate Obama. These represent the "edges" that I mentioned above.

And as to blocking policy, if either side didn't try to block the other side's policy they'd be seen as failures in the eyes of their constituents. On the surface it appears that the republicans are better at policy-blocking than the democrats are....but I have an opinion on that.
 
leaningright said:
Well, it was earlier than "in the end" for the one's whose job it was to "hate" Bush. That is really the key...the one's whose job it was. People like Olberman, Franken, Madcow and other left leaning politicos hated him from the start, as we should expect. Just like you should expect people like you named (Rush, Hannity, Beck...) to hate Obama. These represent the "edges" that I mentioned above.

And as to blocking policy, if either side didn't try to block the other side's policy they'd be seen as failures in the eyes of their constituents. On the surface it appears that the republicans are better at policy-blocking than the democrats are....but I have an opinion on that.
Click to expand...

Who is more popular and has more followers, Olberman, Franken, Madcow... or Beck, Hannity and Rush?

What is your poinion on policy blocking?
 
Jarod said:
Who is more popular and has more followers, Olberman, Franken, Madcow... or Beck, Hannity and Rush?
Click to expand...

Beck, Hannity and Rush

Now my question: Why is it that they have more followers?


What is your poinion on policy blocking?
Click to expand...

I think that there are a several of the "democrats" elected who fall into the blue dog category.....they are more moderate or right-leaning like me. This provides more opposition to very liberal ideology that what might meet the eye with only a Democratic/Repbulican comparison of a legislative body like the House or Senate. It is just an opinion but it is a simplified version of the way I see it... :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top