This is what you said, Robert:

Quote:You know he will be successful

As far as my economic philosophy, you realize you will never, EVER achieve equality of outcomes, no matter what you do, right?

So, answer the question: Romney aside, what about hist first term causes you to believe Barack Obama deserves a second term?

(09-26-2012 01:42 PM)Smaug Wrote:  This is what you said, Robert:

Quote:You know he will be successful

As far as my economic philosophy, you realize you will never, EVER achieve equality of outcomes, no matter what you do, right?

So, answer the question: Romney aside, what about hist first term causes you to believe Barack Obama deserves a second term?

If you mean equal pay, I understand that. By no means do I think that a CEO should get paid the same as a janitor. I am also not looking for a hand out. I just want fair compensation for a hard day of work. What is fair? THat is up to each person I guess. I think that it means enough to put a roof over your head, food and transportation to get to work. Basically, enough so a person doesn't need a handout.

I think it points to a Republican Party that is in shambles... the weakest incumbant president since Carter (worse than GHWB) yet they can't win. Romney and the RNC created a civil war of sorts and now they can't unify their base behind their candidate. They better shore up the base quickly, IMO.

(09-26-2012 02:00 PM)mlb Wrote:  I think it points to a Republican Party that is in shambles... the weakest incumbant president since Carter (worse than GHWB) yet they can't win. Romney and the RNC created a civil war of sorts and now they can't unify their base behind their candidate. They better shore up the base quickly, IMO.

Bingo. Except they won't shore it up.

(09-26-2012 01:06 PM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 01:04 PM)RobertN Wrote:  

(09-26-2012 12:58 PM)Smaug Wrote:  As opposed to issuing a blank check to Barack Obama?

Damn right.

Who said that is what would happen(I mean besides you tea bagger types)? Why not just let him implement his plan? If it fails like you think it will, you tea baggers will gain public support and win the next presidency. Of course, we know why you don't want that. You know he will be successful and if he is successful, that would destroy the tea party once and for all.

He did implement is plans. For two straight years he got virtually all he ever wanted cause he had an overwhelming majority in the House and a fillibuster proof Senate.

He got what he wanted, and it failed.

Sorry, but no. Thanks for playing!

Quote:What this shows is is that there were only two time periods during the 111th Congress when the Democrats had a 60 seat majority:

■From July 7. 2009 (when Al Franken was officially seated as the Senator from Minnesota after the last of Norm Coleman’s challenges came to an end) to August 25, 2009 (when Ted Kennedy died, although Kennedy’s illness had kept him from voting for several weeks before that date at least); and
■From September 25, 2009 (when Paul Kirk was appointed to replace Kennedy) to February 4, 2010 (when Scott Brown took office after defeating Martha Coakley);
■For one day in September 2009, Republicans lacked 40 votes due to the resignation of Mel Martinez, who was replaced the next day by George LeMieux
So, to the extent there was a filibuster proof majority in the Senate it lasted during two brief periods which lasted for a total of just over five months when counted altogether (and Congress was in its traditional summer recess for most of the July-August 2009 time frame).

It’s important to keep this fact in mind when discussing what could have happened in the 111th Congress, I think, and it’s probably something I haven’t kept in mind myself in the past.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/did-the...-how-long/

So Tom, applying that same standard, you'd give GWB a pass for anything that happened when he did not have republican control of the house and a filibuster-proof republican majority in the senate?

Owl, why do you want to continually put words into my mouth when I simply call out someone's "fact" as total bull****? I don't care to apply any standard to W. I'm just saying that Obama in no way shape or form had a 2 year run with a fillibuster proof Senate.

(09-26-2012 11:44 AM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  10 points even makes me question the accuracy of the poll.

35% Dem, 26% Republican, something like 39% Independent sampling.
To only be up by 10 with numbers like that should be troubling to the left.