"People vote Obama because they want stuff"

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.

pandora

Black Diamond wrote:

pandora wrote:

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..

Yeah, I was trying to figure out why lawyers... hence the hmmm

I looked up the bankers that gave to Romney, they were kind of stingy, considering.
Maybe it was really his line of credit with each

I agree the campaign process and election process needs to change...
wait it sounds like just about everything has to change.

jimed14

You really can't look at who gave to the candidates directly ... the Super Pacs were where the real money was.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder ... our-Future

These amounts disgust me ... yes, even your money Jeffery Katzenberg.

mickeyrat

heres what I want.

Continued slow and steady growth.
Serious effort to enact the other things on your agenda. Show us.

Engage us the citizens to get the house to the table. those fucker better represent us all. they got a job to do , so do it ya bastages. If you dont , then return your salaries and repay any and all healthcare expenses you've incurred.

Cradles Broken Glass

I am so sick of seeing ignorant FB post from people on the right saying that most of America wants a handout and that is why Obama got re-elected. That being said, I know that not everyone on the right has that opinion. I do have close friends that are republicans, but they have legitimate reasons for their political stance. The people I am talking about is pulling from a shallow gene pool. Oddly enough, most of those post went up during the work day today, when I was at work, I wonder where they were.

JaneNY

Yup. That's exactly why I voted for Obama. I want stuff. That's it. :roll:

In reality, I simply like the direction he's going better than the other guy. I think he's better for the country, and clearly more than a few of my countrymen agreed with me. It's a good day.

pureoc

cincybearcat wrote:

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.

One of the major positives of this election. They can afford it. If you make that much I don't feel sorry for you having to pay extra. Their should be zero tax breaks for the rich.

Prince Of Dorkness

Ok, I do not want a handout.

Nor do the vast majority of left-leaning voters or the independent voters who saw the alternative.

I want to know that if I pay for health insurance... They can't cut me off should I get gravely ill. That's not a "handout," that's demanding to get what I paid for.

I want to know, with the considerable amount of money I have paid into unemployment insurance that if I should find myself unemployed, I can collect on it. That's not a handout, that's demanding to get what I paid for.

I want to know that should my husband get in a car accident, that I will be allowed into his hospital room.. Be consulted about his care, be considered his husband. That's not a handout, that demanding to be treated equally.

And you know what? I work extremely hard.. Long hours, grueling schedule, massively high-stress job and I get paid pretty damn well for it. But you'll never hear me crying like a little bitch that I have to pay for the roads and bridges and electrical lines and the school down the street even though I have no kids.

That's part of being in a country that offers opportunities like this one does.

Stop saying I want a handout. Especially when you're too stingy to even willingly pay your share of keeping this country working.

Byrnzie

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.

What 'other people' are you referring to here? Are these 'other people' so hard-up that a slight increase in their taxes will hurt them? And is Obama even talking about increasing the taxes of these 'other people', or is he talking about ending tax breaks for these 'other people', such as those they receive for using and maintaining private jets, yachts, and golf-courses?

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

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:

'Raise taxes'? Raise whose taxes?

Byrnzie

Jason P wrote:

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:

Raise taxes? Raise whose taxes?

Does it keep you awake at night thinking that the 1% of mega-rich may not receive special tax breaks anymore? Do you have a special soft-spot for the billionaires of this World? If so, why? Really, I'm intrigued. What makes some people so defensive of a bunch of ultra-rich, who you don't know personally, and who don't give two-shits about you or your well-being.