Did last night's debate change anyone's vote?

Godfather.

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

whygohome

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

*Corporations*. I'm sorry, I had to!!

They loved him in 2008; not so much now:
Bunch of cry-babies
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012 ... t_freeland

whygohome

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

No, we do. We understand quite clearly. But, we also understand the negative aspects of the Military Industrial Complex. And, we understand that if we are going to send kids all over the world to die for _____, kids who make an average of 40-50,000 to go to war and die, then we better fucking ask CEOs, professional athletes, musicians, actors and actresses, reality TV stars, and cable news con men to pay for it.

And even though I don't know exactly what you do, I wouldn't be opposed to giving you a raise either.
That's how important a smart, efficient military is

Godfather.

whygohome wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

*Corporations*. I'm sorry, I had to!!

They loved him in 2008; not so much now:
Bunch of cry-babies
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012 ... t_freeland

no worries man *Corporations*. I can always use the help


Godfather.

whygohome

Godfather. wrote:

whygohome wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

*Corporations*. I'm sorry, I had to!!

They loved him in 2008; not so much now:
Bunch of cry-babies
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012 ... t_freeland

no worries man *Corporations*. I can always use the help


Godfather.

Corleone is easier to spell.

Godfather.

whygohome wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

No, we do. We understand quite clearly. But, we also understand the negative aspects of the Military Industrial Complex. And, we understand that if we are going to send kids all over the world to die for _____, kids who make an average of 40-50,000 to go to war and die, then we better fucking ask CEOs, professional athletes, musicians, actors and actresses, reality TV stars, and cable news con men to pay for it.

And even though I don't know exactly what you do, I wouldn't be opposed to giving you a raise either.
That's how important a smart, efficient military is

:think: well what i was thinking when I posted that was the security of our country.
but *Corporations*. are a greed filled bunch I see it first hand,we in the last 2 to 3 years have layed off over 200 people just in our plant alone and 2 weeks ago 16 people were layed off but we were told that's the end of lay off's....

Godfather.

whygohome

Godfather. wrote:

whygohome wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

if corperations are as in control of the country as many of you all say than I don't see how Obama has a chance at re-election.

Godfather.

No, we do. We understand quite clearly. But, we also understand the negative aspects of the Military Industrial Complex. And, we understand that if we are going to send kids all over the world to die for _____, kids who make an average of 40-50,000 to go to war and die, then we better fucking ask CEOs, professional athletes, musicians, actors and actresses, reality TV stars, and cable news con men to pay for it.

And even though I don't know exactly what you do, I wouldn't be opposed to giving you a raise either.
That's how important a smart, efficient military is

:think: well what i was thinking when I posted that was the security of our country.
but *Corporations*. are a greed filled bunch I see it first hand,we in the last 2 to 3 years have layed off over 200 people just in our plant alone and 2 weeks ago 16 people were layed off but we were told that's the end of lay off's....

Godfather.

I had the security of the country in mind also.
The funny thing is, in my opinion, the field is, and has been, perfectly set for trickle-down economics. Taxes are low--loopholes, CEO pay is unchanged, corporate profits are very strong, Wall St. is through the roof......it's a shame. The poor and the working class ALWAYS pay

ComeToTX

Not many worse ways to spend a night than watching 2 politicians argue.

Moonpig

Godfather. wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I cant decide on either. I dont like either candidate, so they both have a chance with me. But some of Mitt's policies on energy, environment, and expanding military spending are just bad, bad ideas.


This is the real question (great question) about these debates and the rest of the campaigning though...who will each candidate get that is on the fence.

I don't think people understand the importance of a strong military...not to mention it's how I make a living.

Godfather.

Why is a strong military important?

Only things a military is used for is to put others down, or to subvert a nations freedom. Obviously my own opinion. I live in a country with a pretty shit military, yet I don't wake up in the morning in terror of those pesky Russians or Chinese or Iranians or - actually, who are we supposed to be afraid of these days, I'm so last year on all of this.

Godfather.

Moonpig wrote:

Godfather. wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I cant decide on either. I dont like either candidate, so they both have a chance with me. But some of Mitt's policies on energy, environment, and expanding military spending are just bad, bad ideas.


This is the real question (great question) about these debates and the rest of the campaigning though...who will each candidate get that is on the fence.

I don't think people understand the importance of a strong military...not to mention it's how I make a living.

Godfather.

Why is a strong military important?

Only things a military is used for is to put others down, or to subvert a nations freedom. Obviously my own opinion. I live in a country with a pretty shit military, yet I don't wake up in the morning in terror of those pesky Russians or Chinese or Iranians or - actually, who are we supposed to be afraid of these days, I'm so last year on all of this.

I don't know how else to put it other than to say national security, our military techonolgy goes far beyond just killing it also goes a great deal into defense and protecting America from attacks and day to day technology that we use everyday in our personal lives and even medical advancements.

Godfather.

pandora

Some should ask themselves if...

their country's role in the world is like that of the US?

Is their country considered a super power?

Is their threat of violence as great as that of the US?

Is their military small for a reason?

Is ours large for a reason?

I do not think our military should be expanded and I think it should face cuts
as all the social programs, across the board. But we need to be able to put
our military back to work when they come home or it will be another hit
to unemployment therefore costing more. It's the people factor in our military
that matters, jobs for them must be there.

Some aspects of the divided ideology in our country
are very counterproductive and need to change.
Each party can do this but it starts with what the people expect
not with what our representatives do.
We can control both and here lies change.

Moonpig

pandora wrote:

Some should ask themselves if...

their country's role in the world is like that of the US?

Is their country considered a super power?

Is their threat of violence as great as that of the US?

Is their military small for a reason?

Is ours large for a reason?

I do not think our military should be expanded and I think it should face cuts
as all the social programs, across the board. But we need to be able to put
our military back to work when they come home or it will be another hit
to unemployment therefore costing more. It's the people factor in our military
that matters, jobs for them must be there.

Some aspects of the divided ideology in our country
are very counterproductive and need to change.
Each party can do this but it starts with what the people expect
not with what our representatives do.
We can control both and here lies change.

well considering the atrocities committed by America in many parts of the world, I would say no, other countries are not as much at risk.

an other countries military may be small, given they distribute more funding to things that really matter, like health and education.

Such logic may make me a radical thinker lol

JonnyPistachio

Godfather. wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

I cant decide on either. I dont like either candidate, so they both have a chance with me. But some of Mitt's policies on energy, environment, and expanding military spending are just bad, bad ideas.


This is the real question (great question) about these debates and the rest of the campaigning though...who will each candidate get that is on the fence.

I don't think people understand the importance of a strong military...not to mention it's how I make a living.

Godfather.

Sure, some do, and some dont.
I understand the importance, and I also know that the US $pend$ a TON more on military than most of the rest of the world. Mitt wants to expand the military, and spend more money. When was the last time the size and/or spending of our military been at a point where we were vulnerable? Its ridiculous, sorry, and I have friends and family in the military, but its just too much.

pandora

whygohome wrote:

pandora wrote:

whygohome wrote:

But, the Republicans have never acted out this belief. Never. Government has grown under Republicans and so has spending. All of a sudden they are small government and fiscally responsible. the only fiscally responsible President in my lifetime was Clinton

It's never too late
won't know unless we try.

Perhaps the fact that the Federal government is not only broke
but in a hole almost all the way to China... ha!
They will hand power back over to the states, back away from fixing everyone's problems,
give us our money to use as we see fit instead of leaving us stinking broke...
small business too.

Romney is a business man maybe just maybe ...

Legitimate statements/claims; one thing though, the amount of our debt that China has is always overstated.

yes very true I have seen this when researching but have found it confusing
if not China then who?

pandora

Go Beavers wrote:

pandora wrote:

whygohome wrote:

But, the Republicans have never acted out this belief. Never. Government has grown under Republicans and so has spending. All of a sudden they are small government and fiscally responsible. the only fiscally responsible President in my lifetime was Clinton

It's never too late
won't know unless we try.

Perhaps the fact that the Federal government is not only broke
but in a hole almost all the way to China... ha!
They will hand power back over to the states, back away from fixing everyone's problems,
give us our money to use as we see fit instead of leaving us stinking broke...
small business too.

Romney is a business man maybe just maybe ...

"give us our money"? Don't you live in a state that takes more in federal money than it puts in?

if so boy would I not be proud of that! I really don't think of Georgia as my state.
I am a midwesterner, a Milwaukee girl living in the South. 35 years and growing up
there is the basis of who I am.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog ... _feed.html

This was back in 2004, I didn't find anything more recent, this is what you speak of?
The article mentions it as "winning" to be doing so.
If I take that correctly that is the very heart of the mentality I am against.
We are the government and it is our money, not something to scam
nor drain, nor take from.
Get the Federal Govt out of whatever the States can do better and let's not be beholding.

Zoso

he won the debate because he continually talked over Jim L and Obama.. well Obama was rude to Jim also so.. he was more aggressive then Obama. He won but they both talked way too much they needed to get to the damn point. It was boring there was no end in sight to their long winded answers. Next debate hopefully is a little more interesting.. Obama had nothing to prove everyione knows what he has done and what he hasn't.. Willard had it all to prove. He proved he could be more aggressive then Obama and take a stand on a debate issue.

Mitt reminded me of George H bush - 'read my lip'. Every republican has increased taxed on the middle class even when they said they werent before they were elected.. People fall for it everytime.

pandora

Moonpig wrote:

pandora wrote:

Some should ask themselves if...

their country's role in the world is like that of the US?

Is their country considered a super power?

Is their threat of violence as great as that of the US?

Is their military small for a reason?

Is ours large for a reason?

I do not think our military should be expanded and I think it should face cuts
as all the social programs, across the board. But we need to be able to put
our military back to work when they come home or it will be another hit
to unemployment therefore costing more. It's the people factor in our military
that matters, jobs for them must be there.

Some aspects of the divided ideology in our country
are very counterproductive and need to change.
Each party can do this but it starts with what the people expect
not with what our representatives do.
We can control both and here lies change.

well considering the atrocities committed by America in many parts of the world, I would say no, other countries are not as much at risk.

an other countries military may be small, given they distribute more funding to things that really matter, like health and education.

Such logic may make me a radical thinker lol

Perhaps you will list the atrocities so I can better understand what my country has done.
Of course facts only or is your statement based in opinion? or bias?

I would think a country's military would be small because it is not needed therefore
funds are spent elsewhere.

Are you in a country that is an ally of ours?
Therefore we work alongside each other and you may benefit from our defense
if the need arises.

If indeed we come to help in a time of threat or great disaster
would that bring a different opinion of our military?
If your country has a need that we can fulfill? then a tune would change for you?

Zoso

Moonpig wrote:

pandora wrote:

Some should ask themselves if...

their country's role in the world is like that of the US?

Is their country considered a super power?

Is their threat of violence as great as that of the US?

Is their military small for a reason?

Is ours large for a reason?

I do not think our military should be expanded and I think it should face cuts
as all the social programs, across the board. But we need to be able to put
our military back to work when they come home or it will be another hit
to unemployment therefore costing more. It's the people factor in our military
that matters, jobs for them must be there.

Some aspects of the divided ideology in our country
are very counterproductive and need to change.
Each party can do this but it starts with what the people expect
not with what our representatives do.
We can control both and here lies change.

well considering the atrocities committed by America in many parts of the world, I would say no, other countries are not as much at risk.

an other countries military may be small, given they distribute more funding to things that really matter, like health and education.

Such logic may make me a radical thinker lol

it's no secret the US military spending is WAY too much even considering the need to protect the country. The budget is more then Russia, China, England, Japan combined.. meanwhile the poverty rate and gap between rich and poor increases.. Hmmmm sounds a little like the soviet union to me.

peacefrompaul

pandora wrote:

Moonpig wrote:

pandora wrote:

Some should ask themselves if...

their country's role in the world is like that of the US?

Is their country considered a super power?

Is their threat of violence as great as that of the US?

Is their military small for a reason?

Is ours large for a reason?

I do not think our military should be expanded and I think it should face cuts
as all the social programs, across the board. But we need to be able to put
our military back to work when they come home or it will be another hit
to unemployment therefore costing more. It's the people factor in our military
that matters, jobs for them must be there.

Some aspects of the divided ideology in our country
are very counterproductive and need to change.
Each party can do this but it starts with what the people expect
not with what our representatives do.
We can control both and here lies change.

well considering the atrocities committed by America in many parts of the world, I would say no, other countries are not as much at risk.

an other countries military may be small, given they distribute more funding to things that really matter, like health and education.

Such logic may make me a radical thinker lol

Perhaps you will list the atrocities so I can better understand what my country has done.
Of course facts only or is your statement based in opinion? or bias?

I would think a country's military would be small because it is not needed therefore
funds are spent elsewhere.

Are you in a country that is an ally of ours?
Therefore we work alongside each other and you may benefit from our defense
if the need arises.

If indeed we come to help in a time of threat or great disaster
would that bring a different opinion of our military?
If your country has a need that we can fulfill? then a tune would change for you?

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/09/25/world ... index.html

whygohome

pandora wrote:

yes very true I have seen this when researching but have found it confusing
if not China then who?

If you like slideshows:
http://www.cnbc.com/id/29880401/The_Big ... bt?slide=1

Or lists:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/biggest-h ... -debt.html