"People vote Obama because they want stuff"

Zoso

http://nation.foxnews.com/bill-oreilly/ ... w-minority

This old man looks bitter as hell and looks a defeated man. If I could have voted I would have voted for Obama and don't want anything.. A lot of people I know voted for Obama and don't want 'stuff'. Bill is off the mark.. America and the western world are a 'handout' society whether it's tax breaks, welfare, inheritance, SSI, Medicare, student aid, reitrement fund.. Every class in America gets something they don't necessarliy work for. The far right need to get over this notion and quickly otherwise it will cost them many more elections.

cincybearcat

The notion that people vote so that other people pay more and they don't? That's not a notion, it's a reality.

But it is only 1 of the items on the list.

know1

True. It's all free and magic.

Jason P

I'm still amazed that a campaign was run based on the single collective notion that they were going to raise taxes.

And that the candidate won. :fp:

Zoso

cincybearcat wrote:

The notion that people vote so that other people pay more and they don't? That's not a notion, it's a reality.

But it is only 1 of the items on the list.

he is saying that obama voters are the so called now famous lazy depenedent 47% who will get a free ride from Obama.. this is BS.

polaris_x

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

Jeanwah

Fox News should be fun to watch today.

Zoso

Jeanwah wrote:

Fox News should be fun to watch today.

rove, palin and bill look pale, stressed, sad and about to destroy the studio I think last night Palin was sweating!

cincybearcat

Zoso wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

The notion that people vote so that other people pay more and they don't? That's not a notion, it's a reality.

But it is only 1 of the items on the list.

he is saying that obama voters are the so called now famous lazy depenedent 47% who will get a free ride from Obama.. this is BS.

They are part of his voters for sure. No idea how big. But I think it is wrong to just dismiss it. It's a fact. People that pay no income tax and receive all their support ($) from the government (tax payers) get to vote to and it's no surprise who they vote for. The guy/lady that says he/she will give them more.

I know it'
s not a big deal to anyone because it's not their money. But this election just cost every family that makes $250,000 over $10,000 extra next year in taxes. So they vote for who will "give them more" (not take away more really). Not a surprise.

It's funny that the party that recognizing the unsustainable nature of oil and that it will be tapped out the best is the same party that applies that same logic to taxes and $...weird.

Jeanwah

Zoso wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Fox News should be fun to watch today.

rove, palin and bill look pale, stressed, sad and about to destroy the studio I think last night Palin was sweating!

I don't watch tv, but man, that sounds like I really should! And Palin? Really? They resorted to having her on, huh?

Thirty Bills Unpaid

polaris_x wrote:

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

Throw in a dash of moderation, modernization and present a slightly more consistent and transparent 'bigger picture'... and things may have gone much better.

Zoso

Jeanwah wrote:

Zoso wrote:

Jeanwah wrote:

Fox News should be fun to watch today.

rove, palin and bill look pale, stressed, sad and about to destroy the studio I think last night Palin was sweating!

I don't watch tv, but man, that sounds like I really should! And Palin? Really? They resorted to having her on, huh?

yeah they spoke to her from Alaska at about 8:30 in which she was already trashing the president's next 4 years and blaming the anti-bain commercials.. it was pure entertainment and much more exciting then CNN.

polaris_x

Thirty Bills Unpaid wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

Throw in a dash of moderation, modernization and present a slightly more consistent and transparent 'bigger picture'... and things may have gone much better.

he needed to do what harper did up here ... focus the discussion on the current state of affairs ... offer very little on his own plan except the trustworthy tax cuts ... and whatever the heck you do ... stfu on social issues like abortion and gay marriage ... the people that are pro-life and anti gay marriage are already going to vote for you ... all you do there is alienate the moderates ... granted, having a bunch of tea party folk running for senate is not gonna help but still ... the formula is rather simple ... say a whole lot of nothing and it would have been in the bag for him ...

JTH

polaris_x wrote:

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

Romney/Ryan 2012 was essentially the Republican version of Kerry/Edwards 2004.

Go Beavers

cincybearcat wrote:

Zoso wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

The notion that people vote so that other people pay more and they don't? That's not a notion, it's a reality.

But it is only 1 of the items on the list.

he is saying that obama voters are the so called now famous lazy depenedent 47% who will get a free ride from Obama.. this is BS.

They are part of his voters for sure. No idea how big. But I think it is wrong to just dismiss it. It's a fact. People that pay no income tax and receive all their support ($) from the government (tax payers) get to vote to and it's no surprise who they vote for. The guy/lady that says he/she will give them more.

I know it'
s not a big deal to anyone because it's not their money. But this election just cost every family that makes $250,000 over $10,000 extra next year in taxes. So they vote for who will "give them more" (not take away more really). Not a surprise.

It's funny that the party that recognizing the unsustainable nature of oil and that it will be tapped out the best is the same party that applies that same logic to taxes and $...weird.

We'll digest the numbers on who voted for who in the next few days, but I'm sure you'll see that in blue states, people making over $250,000 went with Obama.

brianlux

It's like the negative ads keep running. C'mon- let's move ahead.

polaris_x

JTH wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

Romney/Ryan 2012 was essentially the Republican version of Kerry/Edwards 2004.

yeah ... although bush did get extra-curricular help in securing a reelection ...

cincybearcat

polaris_x wrote:

again ... something republicans are ignoring ... romney was a horrible candidate and ran a horrible campaign ... highlighted by the fact there was a lame duck president he was going against ... :fp:

I don;t think Mitt is a bad candidate, I think the party made him a bad candidate. BUt I agree on the campaign. Obama's machine proved it's worth yet again. They nailed it.

cincybearcat

Go Beavers wrote:

We'll digest the numbers on who voted for who in the next few days, but I'm sure you'll see that in blue states, people making over $250,000 went with Obama.

Well, when you pick a color and stick with it for life reality doesn;t matter. I'm talking more about the people that don't have their next vote planned 100% already.

polaris_x

cincybearcat wrote:

I don;t think Mitt is a bad candidate, I think the party made him a bad candidate. BUt I agree on the campaign. Obama's machine proved it's worth yet again. They nailed it.

i think my assertion prior to the campaign that mitt represented the worst characteristics of politician came through ... a sell out, liar, unintelligent and a fraud ... all those traits played a part in him losing an easily winnable election ...

cincybearcat

polaris_x wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I don;t think Mitt is a bad candidate, I think the party made him a bad candidate. BUt I agree on the campaign. Obama's machine proved it's worth yet again. They nailed it.

i think my assertion prior to the campaign that mitt represented the worst characteristics of politician came through ... a sell out, liar, unintelligent and a fraud ... all those traits played a part in him losing an easily winnable election ...

Well shocking that I don't agree with you 100%...but I will agree with the sell-out part. I say an article on cnn.com about the religious right losing it's grip...I can only hope.

I will give Obama credit for one thing, next election, I'm going to do more to be apart of the process in the real world. He talked about uniting....didn;t do it, instead drove a wedge (sure republicans in congress helped and I wouldn't vote for them either). Then he did it again after this election. Really? I call bullshit Mr. President. Man, I hope the Dems run Biden and the repubs run a moderate...otherwise I'm going to be figuring out how to help a 3rd party candidate.

brianlux

cincybearcat wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

I don;t think Mitt is a bad candidate, I think the party made him a bad candidate. BUt I agree on the campaign. Obama's machine proved it's worth yet again. They nailed it.

i think my assertion prior to the campaign that mitt represented the worst characteristics of politician came through ... a sell out, liar, unintelligent and a fraud ... all those traits played a part in him losing an easily winnable election ...

Well shocking that I don't agree with you 100%...but I will agree with the sell-out part. I say an article on cnn.com about the religious right losing it's grip...I can only hope.

I will give Obama credit for one thing, next election, I'm going to do more to be apart of the process in the real world. He talked about uniting....didn;t do it, instead drove a wedge (sure republicans in congress helped and I wouldn't vote for them either). Then he did it again after this election. Really? I call bullshit Mr. President. Man, I hope the Dems run Biden and the repubs run a moderate...otherwise I'm going to be figuring out how to help a 3rd party candidate.

Cincy, how did Obama drive a wedge last night? I didn't get that. What am I missing?

cp3iverson

There's obviously a big group of people out there who love handouts and who have the "why should you have this and not me?" mentality. They exist and it's sad. They refuse to work hard in a country built on hard work. Someone who earned something by paying for school, interning, or just by working hard and climbing up should never have to be penalized for these people. I hope no party ever helps these people.
The question is how do you weed those people out of the misfortunate people who actually don't want handouts but have to accept them to get by sometimes? If that could be solved all classes of people would be better off.

cincybearcat

brianlux wrote:

Cincy, how did Obama drive a wedge last night? I didn't get that. What am I missing?

He did it his first term. And then he fed people a bunch of bs in his speech and they bought it again.

JTH

cincybearcat wrote:

brianlux wrote:

Cincy, how did Obama drive a wedge last night? I didn't get that. What am I missing?

He did it his first term. And then he fed people a bunch of bs in his speech and they bought it again.

I think I know what you're referring to here, but your assertions hold zero water if you don't back them up with specific examples. It just sounds like you're regurgitating the rhetoric of conservative pundits.

Black Diamond

Go Beavers wrote:

We'll digest the numbers on who voted for who in the next few days, but I'm sure you'll see that in blue states, people making over $250,000 went with Obama.

Well my state has not made up it mind :fp:
But I do and I did...

cincybearcat

JTH wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

brianlux wrote:

Cincy, how did Obama drive a wedge last night? I didn't get that. What am I missing?

He did it his first term. And then he fed people a bunch of bs in his speech and they bought it again.

I think I know what you're referring to here, but your assertions hold zero water if you don't back them up with specific examples. It just sounds like you're regurgitating the rhetoric of conservative pundits.

Honestly, I'm tired of constantly typing them. You do watch the news right? It's factual. The republicans in congress throw some tantrums and Obama abandoned his campaign pledge as soon as the going got tough. So, he decided to attack the evil "rich" and businesses because he knew he could get people to vote to take moe $ from other people. And it worked. He was lazy and he lost my support when it happened. He ran a negative administration, nevermind the negative campaigning by both.

jimed14

In my opinion ... it's not the fiscal conservatives that lost last night ... it's the social conservatives.

You put a VP on the ticket that has historically the single toughest stance against abortion ... you have Roe v Wade possibly in jeopardy with the potential for the 2012 Pres to nominate not one, but potentially 2 Supreme Court judges ... you have two senate races where the republican candidates make abhorrent statements about women and rape ...

... and you wonder why women go flocking to the democratic side?


Then ... you have all the hard right deportation talk in the Republican primaries ... their solution to immigration is putting up a huge wall ... their continuous efforts to vote against or block via filibusterer, the DREAM act ...

... and you wonder why Latinos go flocking to the democratic side?

I would love to hear the republican parties' thoughts on the economy once they've realized they need to support the social well being of the entire population, not just those that are for the benefit of and are dictated by white males (of which, I am one).

pandora

Go Beavers wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

We'll digest the numbers on who voted for who in the next few days, but I'm sure you'll see that in blue states, people making over $250,000 went with Obama.

Radio news said the number one group contributing to Obama were lawyers...
then it listed a few other professions

hmmm... lawyers

Black Diamond

pandora wrote:

Go Beavers wrote:

cincybearcat wrote:

We'll digest the numbers on who voted for who in the next few days, but I'm sure you'll see that in blue states, people making over $250,000 went with Obama.

Radio news said the number one group contributing to Obama were lawyers...
then it listed a few other professions

hmmm... lawyers

And Bankers were number 1 with Romney... Your point?

How about real campaign reform... An amendment so the courts can't touch it... No more Super Pacs..

comebackgirl

jimed14 wrote:

In my opinion ... it's not the fiscal conservatives that lost last night ... it's the social conservatives.

You put a VP on the ticket that has historically the single toughest stance against abortion ... you have Roe v Wade possibly in jeopardy with the potential for the 2012 Pres to nominate not one, but potentially 2 Supreme Court judges ... you have two senate races where the republican candidates make abhorrent statements about women and rape ...

... and you wonder why women go flocking to the democratic side?


Then ... you have all the hard right deportation talk in the Republican primaries ... their solution to immigration is putting up a huge wall ... their continuous efforts to vote against or block via filibusterer, the DREAM act ...

... and you wonder why Latinos go flocking to the democratic side?

I would love to hear the republican parties' thoughts on the economy once they've realized they need to support the social well being of the entire population, not just those that are for the benefit of and are dictated by white males (of which, I am one).

Good points. What's the "stuff" that i want? To know my uterus is safe.