Want to protect your cyber security and still get fast solutions? Ask a secure question today.Go Premium

x
  • Status: Solved
  • Priority: Medium
  • Security: Public
  • Views: 68
  • Last Modified:

Which Candidate?

If you're a deadbeat, a government leech, a welfare mom with 10 kids from 11 different dads, which presidential candidate would you support?
0
EricLynnWright
Asked:
EricLynnWright
  • 24
  • 21
  • 6
  • +3
5 Solutions
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
How would any of us know?  I doubt that anyone here on EE fits those categories.  Maybe you could do a survey in one of your local neighborhoods.
0
 
WaterStreetCommented:
Answer -- A trick question: Most likely the described person will not vote or won't know to remember the difference between the candidates, and might even vote for Romney.

I understand there are 4 thousand millionaires among the 47%, non tax paying, "deadbeats."
They are overwhelmingly more likely to vote for Romney, while the person you described is overwhelmingly likely to not vote at all, for the reason I stated above.

(Thanks for the fun, I was just sitting here with nothing to do.  Gotta love you or your question)
0
 
beetosCommented:
Does the amount of kids matter?


Because if not, maybe you should ask Romney's Dad?
0
Get expert help—faster!

Need expert help—fast? Use the Help Bell for personalized assistance getting answers to your important questions.

 
WaterStreetCommented:
"Speaking of not paying taxes & entitlement, how about the 26 Fortune 500 corporations that haven’t paid tax in 4 years?"
http://eclectablog.com/2012/09/speaking-of-not-paying-taxes-entitlement-how-about-the-26-corporations-that-havent-paid-tax-in-4-years.html

They support Romney.  Oops, corporations are a class of "people" who can't vote.


Romney lied (again) when he  said almost half of Americans think of themselves as victims who do not "take personal responsibility and care for their lives."  If not federal income tax, about 2/3 of that half pay some kind of taxes such as payroll, state, or local taxes income taxes

"Of the [remaining] 18.1% [of Americans] paying no income or payroll taxes, more than half (10.3% of all households) were elderly, so retired people who may well have paid income and payroll taxes, as well as others, during their working lives. Of the remainder, 6.9% of all households did not pay income or payroll taxes, essentially because they were poor, [having incomes of $20,00 or less] leaving 1% of "others" who did not pay either of these two types of taxes. Presumably, within the "others" category would fall the likes of six of the 400 US tax filers in 2009 with the highest adjusted gross income (at least $77m), who, according to Internal Revenue Service studies, paid no US income tax, and the 19,551 US households with income above $200,000 who owed no US or foreign income tax.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/18/romneys-47-percent-us-election?newsfeed=true
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>They support Romney

GE is on that list.  The CEO, who has outsourced a ton of jobs, is on Obama's jobs council.

Pretty sure he doesn't support Romney.



>>Does the amount of kids matter?

Only if they share the mommy but not the daddy.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
ID: 38419627
ID: 38419576

Both good posts!  (course WS's was better)
0
 
beetosCommented:
GE is on that list.  The CEO, who has outsourced a ton of jobs, is on Obama's jobs council.

Pretty sure he doesn't support Romney.

Romney's Dad was on welfare.   Who would he support?
0
 
beetosCommented:
Both you and Romney are a bit mistaken.   Here's an interesting rebuttal to the whole premise:

Still, for my money, the worst of Romney’s comments were these: “My job is not to worry about those people. I’ll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives.”

When he said this, Romney didn’t just write off half the country behind closed doors. He also confirmed the worst suspicions about who he is: an entitled rich guy with no understanding of how people who aren’t rich actually live.

The thing about not having much money is you have to take much more responsibility for your life. You can’t pay people to watch your kids or clean your house or fix your meals. You can’t necessarily afford a car or a washing machine or a home in a good school district. That’s what money buys you: goods and services that make your life easier.

That’s what money has bought Romney, too. He’s a guy who sold his dad’s stock to pay for college, who built an elevator to ensure easier access to his multiple cars and who was able to support his wife’s decision to be a stay-at-home mom. That’s great! That’s the dream.

The problem is that he doesn’t seem to realize how difficult it is to focus on college when you’re also working full time, how much planning it takes to reliably commute to work without a car, or the agonizing choices faced by families in which both parents work and a child falls ill. The working poor haven’t abdicated responsibility for their lives. They’re drowning in it.


http://www.alternet.org/hot-news-views/how-romneys-47-percent-mentality-linked-voter-suppression
0
 
WaterStreetCommented:
beetos,

I hadn't thought of the angle you came in from.  Of course you are right; many of those who are working with incomes below the threshold for paying income tax have to be responsible and scramble to keep a household together, and maybe try to secure a future for their children.

EDIT:  They're drowning in responsibility.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Yeah, that's the part of Romney's statement that really offends me.  

The media is focusing on the "47% who are on the gov't dole and will therefore vote for Obama" while ignoring the part where he said basically 47% of the country "can't take responsibility for their own lives".

This is a common narrative in the conservative sphere, and one that Ericars constantly promulgates.   It wreaks of the "Southern Strategy".
0
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
Until my Social Security Retirement kicked in 3 years, ago I was living very much hand to mouth.  I could make $20 feed me for a week.  I doubt that Romney has ever come close to that.  He's always been more in the $20 per meal category.  I think I've had to be more responsible and do more budgeting than he has.  Yall ought to vote for me.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>When he said this, Romney didn’t just write off half the country behind closed doors.

Obama could join a satanic cult, sacrifice puppies, and eat dog poop on national TV and the Obamabots would still think he's great.  Of course, the media wouldn't report it, but still.

The point is no matter what happens or how much damage Obama does to the country he's still going to get a certain % of the vote.

Whether you like it or not - if you're moocher then you're more than likely a Democrat.


>>He's always been more in the $20 per meal category.

Romney earned every dime and created numerous REAL jobs in the process.  He didn't have to borrow from China to add overpriced Washington DC jobs.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Whether you like it or not - if you're moocher then you're more than likely a Democrat.

Really?

"Moochers" by state

Where do Romney's "moochers" live?
0
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
I believe you when you say that Romney earned what he has.  I believe me when I say that he doesn't seem to know much about the rest of America, how they live, and what they need.  And since he can't get them to vote for him, he doesn't care what happens to them.  He will not even try to be a President for all of us.  And Eric, I doubt that you have enough money and influence to be someone he cares about.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>I believe me when I say that he doesn't seem to know much about the rest of America, how they live, and what they need.

You base this on what?


>>He will not even try to be a President for all of us.

Obama is the most divisive president in history.  



>>And Eric, I doubt that you have enough money and influence to be someone he cares about.

If Romney cares about lowering the national debt, job creation, strong military, entitlement reform, and ending Obama's burdensome/job killing regulations, then he's acting in my and your best interest.



>>Where do Romney's "moochers" live?

Cute but silly.
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
> Obama is the most divisive president in history.  

Except for, you know, his immediate predecessor.

> If Romney cares [...] then he's acting in my and your best interest.

Yep.  Glad you included the 'If' in there.  He's already convinced many that he doesn't, and therefore isn't.

> Cute but silly.

But backed up by hard numbers.  It's only silly because it doesn't support your conclusions.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>He's already convinced many that he doesn't, and therefore isn't.

You guys are further proving Romney's overall point.  No matter how much of a failure Obama is, there are just going to be those that support him no matter.



>>But backed up by hard numbers.

Yeah, right.  


RECENT ECONOMIC NEWS:

1.  More Americans Added to Food Stamps Than Find Jobs
2.  For Every $1 Added to the Economy, Obama Added More Than $3 in Debt
3. Anxiety Mounts as US Economy Limps Into 2nd Half
4.  Obama Said That Unemployment Would Be Much, Much Lower By Now
5.  Unemployment rates rose in 44 U.S. states in July
6. 'Real' Unemployment Rate Shows Far More Jobless
7.  The Unprecedented Increase in food stamps
8.  Over 100 Million Now Receiving Federal Welfare
0
 
beetosCommented:
Your conclusion is wrong Eric.

Those of us with respect for facts and who have memories realize that while the economy isn't great, it was in a serious state of calamity and is now heading in the right direction albeit slowly.  
We know that Obama didn't cause this calamity, and instead has been working to fix it.  

We also know that the Republican party has been working to stymie that recovery as much as possible in a feeble attempt to regain the White House.   It's actually despicable.  

"Cute, but silly"

The data shows that the Romney base is voting against their own interests, and Romney's statement was wildly misleading:  It's not the Obama supporters that comprise the bulk of the 47%, it's the Romney supporters that do so.
0
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
By his own words, Romney doesn't care about half the population and does not consider them acceptable people because he thinks they are not trying to take care of themselves.  There's no sign but political rhetoric that Romney cares about any of the things you've mentioned.  Finding things wrong with Obama does not make Romney right.
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
> Whether you like it or not - if you're moocher then you're more than likely a Democrat.

Unless you are a really, really big moocher, in which case you are more likely to be a Republican.

Of course if you consider someone retired on social security because they've paid into it for decades a moocher, you are probably a Republican.

Or if you consider a veteran on disability because they've lost limbs in a war started by the Republican party a moocher, then you are probably a Republican.

Or if you consider a college education something reserved for the elite, and therefore students who spend a few years learning before earning a waste of time and a bunch of moochers, then you are probably a Republican.

 If you don't believe in evolution in nature, then you are probably a Republican.

If you believe people who don't worship like you are automatically trouble, you are probably a Republican (or Taliban, but the lines have blurred so much in recent years.)

If you think teaching critical thinking skills are a waste of time, you are probably a Republican.

> You guys are further proving Romney's overall point.  No matter how much of a failure Obama is, there are just going to be those that support him no matter.

When the alternative is Romney, yeah.  Give me a Reagan, and we'll talk... but the Republicans don't have another Reagan, and even if they did, they'd call him a liberal and boot him out of the party.  When the alternative is folks like Romney, Ryan, supported by folks like Buchanan, Bachmann, Cheney, Rove and the rest of the super conservatives... yeah... I'm gonna support the lesser of the two evils.  When a vice presidential nominee stands up and essentially says he knows that smart people will never vote for him... yeah... I'm gonna go the other way.

You're making the same flawed assumption the GOP is making... that by throwing enough negative stuff out there, and trying to say it's the Democrats fault, that someone is gonna believe they are better.  When the Republicans who do have power can't come up with a better plan than, 'Hey, lets make the other guy look bad," don't look all shocked when we don't come flocking to your banner.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>Give me a Reagan, and we'll talk.

You're supporting a community organizer with ties to domestic terrorists.  A guy that sat in a "church" for 20 years listening to his preacher yell "G*d damn America!" and that the US brought 9/11 upon itself.

And then you bring up Reagan, who is the complete antithesis of what we have in the white house now?

That makes a lot of sense.



>>Hey, lets make the other guy look bad,

He's made himself look bad.  Ask the 23 million out of work.  Ask your grand kids if they like paying the Obama debt that was wasted on GM and Solyndra.

If you're happy with 11% REAL unemployment, $6 trillion added in debt, more people getting food stamps than jobs, a weakened military, a world that no longer respects us, then by all means vote for the community organizer.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>We also know that the Republican party has been working to stymie that recovery as much as possible in a feeble attempt to regain the White House.

That's bullshit.

The Democrats controlled everything for 2 years.  Everything they wanted they passed.
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
So, once again, don't tell me how bad the current guy is... show me someone really good.  Romney ain't it.  I've already got that message loud and clear.  I'm not saying I'd support Obama no matter what, what I'm saying is that I don't see anyone better.  And every time you and the rest of the right-wing nuts tell me how bad Obama is, it makes me realize how truly f*cked up the Republicans are they can not bring out someone better.  Continuing the negative attacks might be amusing, but it certainly isn't helpful or useful.

And a preacher who yelled about how the US brought 9/11 upon itself is doubly amusing because the Republican President who presided over that disaster brought out a preacher who said the same thing... in a national service intended to heal the country, attended by... wait for it... the Republican President.  Ohh... the same Republican President with ties to international terrorist who were actually responsible for 9/11.

We can sling negatives around all day long.  Still doesn't accomplish anything.

> a world that no longer respects us

Actually, the numbers I've seen show that the world respects the US more.  What I've seen is that they've been losing respect for us because...
  (1) The US even CONSIDERED morons like Bachmann, Perry and Ginrich for the presidency, and that Romney MIGHT still get in.
  (2) That the majority of the US still doesn't believe in Evolution, and that the Republican party continues to work against science.
  (3) That the US still hasn't adopted the metric system, preferring the company of Myanmar and Liberia in using an antiquated system of measurements.
... but overall, they've respected the US more since electing Obama to the top office.

> He's made himself look bad
You really don't follow the news, do you?  (FOX doesn't count as news.)
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>You really don't follow the news, do you?

Excluding me - most of the people in this forum get their information from the Comedy channel

Can't even get NBC to cover anything remotely negative against Obama.  Apparently your news is filtered or you don't care about the millions on food stamps and out of work.


>>So, once again, don't tell me how bad the current guy is.

Whether you know it, you have two choices in the fall:  a governor with years of executive experience in the private market or a community organizer with ties to terrorists, slum lords, radical preachers, 9/11 truthers, and other nut jobs.  



>>Actually, the numbers I've seen show that the world respects the US more.

Maybe in fantasy land.  See the middle east.

OBAMA:
THE DAY I'M INAUGURATED MUSLIM HOSTILITY WILL EASE
0
 
beetosCommented:
 Apparently your news is filtered or you don't care about the millions on food stamps and out of work.

We know you (and Romney/Ryan) don't care about them - you both think they're deadbeats and leeches.
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
> Excluding me - most of the people in this forum get their information from the Comedy channel

Which, if they do, would still be more reliable than FOX, and organization that went to court to defend their right to tell bold face lies.
But given that we only have four experts in this question, and I don't get my news there, and beetos gave you a great big US map that wasn't from Comedy Central, I think we can discount your ability to judge 'most'.

> Whether you know it, you have two choices in the fall:
Or to couch it the other way: a president with years of executive experience, who has the respect of foreign leaders, or a corporate raider who breaks up companies and sends jobs overseas, hides his assets overseas, and associates with a party who abhors science, women's rights, and would usher in a dark age the likes of which hasn't been seen in millenia.

While slinging the negative might be fun, it still doesn't accomplish anything.

> Maybe in fantasy land.

Right... I keep forgetting that Republicans like to consider everything outside the US as fantasy land.  In the REAL world outside the US, they also want Obama reelected... not that they actually get much of a choice.  (I suppose they could pour cash into the campaign...)
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
Hmm... I do see where recent % in the middle east are still low.  Looks like, overall, the world still respects the US more now than under any other president during this century.  Thank goodness the Republicans set the bar so low, eh?  The world was happier a couple years ago with a slightly younger Obama, but there is no indication that they respect Romney more...
0
 
beetosCommented:
Nice try Razmus,  but facts are completely irrelevant to Eric.
0
 
Rich WeisslerProfessional Troublemaker^h^h^h^h^hshooterCommented:
I know.  And I kinda understand his point.  Like I've said many times, Obama isn't my ideal candidate.  Beyond my intense dislike of anything the Republicans have put forth since Pat Buchanan spoke at the 1992 Republican Convention, I'm voting for Obama this fall because:

  1. I like the idea of actually having a choice for my health insurance provider.  'Obamacare', as it's been coined, actually has provisions to allow a free market for insurance providers.  Right now, my only reasonable choice is to go with whatever health care system bribes my employer... and they decide who will provide me coverage.  I want a free market.  Further, I believe 'Obamacare' is the best way to pay for the unfunded 1986 "Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act".  Yes, it means I MIGHT get taxed a little, but it means fewer people will get the free ride they've gotten under the previous legislation.
  2. I'm hopeful 'No Child Left Behind' legislation will be removed or made irrelevant.  I don't necessarily want to leave anyone behind, but the current provisions hold back the kids who could truly soar.
  3. I'm hopeful the exceptions requested by the Republican Governors which have extended free welfare to people will be removed.
  4. I'm hopeful the tax loopholes will be closed.  I've been paying my fair share of taxes for decades, and feel its about time other folks who CAN pay their taxes do so.
  5. I believe higher education is important, and the way the far right talks about higher education bothers me a lot.  To compete in the world market over the next generations, the US is going to have to invest more in education.
  6. I believe in a woman's right to chose what happens to her body.
  7. I believe people who love each other sufficiently to make a life commitment to each other should be permitted to do so.  I'm still don't want to see PDA, and am uncomfortable with homosexuality, but don't see why a gay couple should be able to escape the shackles of matrimony if they are comfortable with it.
  8. I believe in the separation of church and state.
  9. I believe the Democratic party is more capable of fielding a competent foreign policy team.  (In my youth, as much as I might have personally disliked Nixon, I have to grant that he could do foreign policy.)  I fear a Republican president would put more Boltons in embassies.

Now, that said, I'm much less than thrilled with Obama's treatment of manned space missions.  While I'm all for free markets, which is where Obama has put the US space launch vehicle program, I believe this qualifies as basic research.  I'm actually coming around on the idea with the recent successes of SpaceX.

On the issue of welfare and public handouts, they aren't a hot button issue, but what I've seen is that there would be fewer government handouts on a Democratic ticket than Republican.

Now, given the amount of time I've considered the questions, and the issues... what I don't understand why anyone would think that name calling would change my mind.
0
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
If you actually knew in a detailed technical way how to govern the country, you would find it virtually impossible to explain.  The political audience runs the gamut from the bright but self-centered to those who can't balance a check book.  We select our representatives from that group also since that is basically all of us.

Since it is impossible to explain what should be done, we revert as we always have to 'tribal loyalties' where we pretty much just go along with 'our guy'.  When we were still living in small tribes in the bush and the forest, we would just keep to our little territory.  We would have agreements with the tribes next door that would keep the peace most of the time.

Now that we are great big tribes that live all mixed up, it seems harder to be peaceful and civil because 'those' people are allowed to live among us.  So, as someone pointed out elsewhere, a lot of people tend to gather with others that hate the same things that they do.  It's much easier to use sound bites and buzz words to attack your opponents than it is to build anything good.

And technology has made that worse.  In the 1950's, a person (usually a man) could 'understand' and deal with and fix most of the technology around them with their own hands and tools.  Now, 70 years later, even us that have been working in technology all this time don't have the resources and knowledge to 'fix everything'.  It makes you feel less competent to deal with the things in your own life.

And it makes you much more likely to just lash out at things.  I rarely see anybody bragging about something they've built.  When I was a kid, people weren't necessarily all that nicer but you would see the people that 'built' their own hot rods and science projects.  About all I see now is 'art' and lot of it ain't that great.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>  I like the idea of actually having a choice for my health insurance provider.

Or you like the idea of having the largest middle class tax increase in US history.  Obamacare is a pile of dog sh*t that will end up damaging the economy (job killer) and result in a doctor shortage.  

--Tax penalty to hit nearly 6M uninsured people

--NYTs: Doctor Shortage Likely to Worsen With Health Law


>>I believe in a woman's right to chose what happens to her body.

Phony issue whipped up by Democrats to avoid talking about the economy.

Sad that you would trade another $6 trillion in debt and a horrible economy just so some chick can kill her baby.



>>On the issue of welfare and public handouts, they aren't a hot button issue

Freebies handed out by democrats but funded by Republicans.  Democrats use tax dollars to buy votes.  I'm tired of paying for Obama's investments in failed projects like GM and Solyndra.  


How many times does Obama have to admit he's a socialist before you guys get the hint?
0
 
beetosCommented:
Phony issue whipped up by Democrats to avoid talking about the economy.


How come every time Republican policies are criticized, it's a distraction from the economy?


Existing home sales are up.
New home building is up.
The Dow, which dropped to nearly 6,000 is now close to 14,000

REPUBLICANS PASSED 400 BILLS AIMED AT LIMITING WOMEN'S RIGHTS AND DEFUNDING WOMEN'S HEALTH CARE CENTERS.

Freebies handed out by democrats but funded by Republicans.  Democrats use tax dollars to buy votes.  I'm tired of paying for Obama's investments in failed projects like GM and Solyndra.

Without those freebies, you likely wouldn't have Romney as a candidate;  his father needed welfare when he came to the US.  Nice that he could do that by the way, even though the people born around him couldn't do the same.  

GM isn't a failure by any stretch, as much as you'd like it to be.  Conservatives have been repeating the lie that Obama did what Romney said he should for GM; a managed bankruptcy.  It can't be both a failure because of what Obama did, and a success because Obama did what Romney said to do.   That would lead to CHAOS ON BULLSHIT MOUNTAIN!!!
0
 
Dave BaldwinFixer of ProblemsCommented:
Eric, I know a few other people like you.  You and they spend all of their time criticizing the President and never have a good thing to say about anyone.  Other people don't want to live in a world where behavior like that is acceptable or normal, it would be just too depressing.

In addition, merely finding fault does not get anything done.  Since you do nothing else, we have to stop listening to you and those like you so we can find leadership and a future somewhere else.  Your trip is a pointless dead-end.  Even a flawed plan and action is better than none at all.

Besides, after hearing the things that Romney and Ryan have said recently, I wonder if they are not secretly part of the Committee to Re-Elect the President.  Maybe you are too.  We don't want leadership that constantly says all these nasty and hateful things.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Cheer up Eric - maybe the Muslims don't hate us as much as you think:

BENGHAZI, Libya — Hundreds of protesters stormed the compound of one of Libya's strongest armed Islamic extremist groups Friday, evicting militiamen and setting fire to their building as the attack that killed the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans sparked a public backlash against armed groups that run rampant in the country and defy the country's new, post-Moammar Gadhafi leadership.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/21/benghazi-anti-militia-protest_n_1903846.html
0
 
beetosCommented:
Not only that, but the economy is getting better.   Even Fox News admits it:

We’ve gotten non-stop news about the economy since 2007, when President George W. Bush told us we were in the midst of what economists would later call the most severe recession since the Great Depression.

These days, the economy, while often described as sluggish, is finally improving.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/21/three-simple-ways-to-save-lot-money/#ixzz279sSbsFm
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>In addition, merely finding fault does not get anything done.

Not finding fault would mean keeping Jimmy Carter on roids in office.  That means another $6 trillion in debt added, millions out of work, regulations that strangle small businesses, rewarding failure, bailing out unions, and a weakened US country.




>>We don't want leadership that constantly says all these nasty and hateful things.

Like saying Mitt Romney --via Bain-- killed a lady, or calling Mitt a felon?




>>Cheer up Eric - maybe the Muslims don't hate us as much as you think:

Only the Huffington Post would attempt to defend radical Muslims.



>>Not only that, but the economy is getting better.  

I guess that would be news to all the unemployed, especially all 766K women out of work since Obama took office.  And would also mean the just recently announced bond-buying program by Bernanke was all in vain.
0
 
beetosCommented:
There were actually a lot more people out of work since Obama took office, but things have turned around and there are a lot less unemployed than there were.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>There were actually a lot more people out of work since Obama took office, but things have turned around and there are a lot less unemployed than there were.

Nope.  We have more people NOT working than when Obama took office.  He's the ONLY president to not have created one, net new job.


CNN:  overall, there are still fewer people working now than when Obama took office
0
 
beetosCommented:
While that is indeed a gain of 4.5 million, it's only a net gain of 300,000 over the course of the Obama administration to date. The private jobs figure stood at 111 million in January 2009, the month Obama took office.

And total nonfarm payrolls, including government workers, are down from 133.6 million workers at the beginning of 2009 to 133.2 million in July 2012. There's been a net loss of nearly 1 million public-sector jobs since Obama took office, despite a surge in temporary hiring for the 2010 census.

He HAS added jobs in the Private sector.   Government jobs are down, but isn't that what you conservatives wanted?
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
Any jobs in the private sector are DESPITE Obama.

Imagine how many jobs we'd have if he allowed the pipline, less regulations, and lower taxes on job creators?


>>Government jobs are down

Government jobs are temporary and add no value.  Those are the jobs Obama would prefer to focus on.  What I don't get is how Democrats are so stupid as to think we can load up the cart but forget the horses needed to pull it?

Harry Reid:  ...government jobs must take priority over private-sector jobs
0
 
beetosCommented:
Imagine how many jobs we'd have if he allowed the pipline, less regulations, and lower taxes on job creators?

20,000?

So let me get this straight,  Bush isn't to blame, Obama is.  But if jobs are created, it's not because of Obama, it's despite him?

Government jobs are temporary and add no value.  Those are the jobs Obama would prefer to focus on.  What I don't get is how Democrats are so stupid as to think we can load up the cart but forget the horses needed to pull it?

Again Eric, those jobs are down by about a MILLION.    

How can you complain about things that are happening that you want to happen?  

We've stopped bleeding jobs and started adding them.  In fact, we're finally back on the plus side.  Wait, Obama's President?  He couldn't have had anything to do with that!

You want less government jobs, well you got 'em.   That should be a good thing right?  Oh wait, not if Obama's going to get credit!


This shows how blindly partisan you are.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>Bush isn't to blame, Obama is

Obama is president.


>>Again Eric, those jobs are down by about a MILLION.    

They're down because they were TEMPORARILY up.  He borrowed and printed money to create fake, temporary jobs.  Only Democrats think that borrowing money we don't have and spending on temporary jobs is the result of a genius at work.  


>>How can you complain about things that are happening that you want to happen?  

It costs us a trillion dollars of wasted spending to create fake, temporary jobs.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Obama is president.

And jobs were created - more than when he took office, which was in the midst of the great Recession.   Therefore, even by your own logic, you must give him credit.  

These are private sector jobs - the kind you want, right?
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>These are private sector jobs - the kind you want, right?

Unemployment is 8.3%, black unemployment is around 15%, Obama has not created one net new job, more people are going on food stamps than are finding work.



Washington Examiner: number of able-bodied adults on food stamps doubled after Obama suspended work requirement
0
 
beetosCommented:
Obama has not created one net new job, more people are going on food stamps than are finding work.

If you look at the private sector, he's plus 300,000 - and that's from the article you cited earlier.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>If you look at the private sector, he's plus 300,000

What kind of jobs?

CBS: Median Income Worse Now Than It Was During Great Recession
A new report put out by the Pew Research Center finds that the median income is worse now than it was during the Great Recession
0
 
beetosCommented:
That's true,  due to conservative leaders who enact laws which favor business over workers.

The Republican party has launched a "war on Unions", and this kind of thing will be the result.

Keep driving wages and benefits down, so the bottom line can come up for the few at the top!
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>That's true,  due to conservative leaders who enact laws which favor business over workers.

Don't be so gullible, McFly.   Two things:  (1) Obama controlled congress for TWO years.  (2) People work for businesses, do they not?


>>The Republican party has launched a "war on Unions",

I certainly hope so!  Unions are bankrupting local governments big time.  See Chicago.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Two things:  (1) Obama controlled congress for TWO years.  (2) People work for businesses, do they not?

1). I guess that goes to show that Obama isn't the dictator you guys keep making him out to be?   And yes Congress SHOULD have been able to pass anything the Dems wanted because they had the majority vote, but as we've seen, that matters not when you don't have a Super majority if the minority party wants to be obstructionist.

2).  And if you had your way, they'd be doing so for soup and a piece of bread - you'd rather have business run like Foxconn than GM.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>> I guess that goes to show that Obama isn't the dictator you guys keep making him out to be?  

It shows he doesn't give fuck about people trying to find a job.
0
 
beetosCommented:
LOL


Republicans don't care about people finding jobs.   Didn't they just block a bill designed to help veterans who are trying to find work?
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
Yet another example showing just how stupid Obama supporters are...


Howard Stern Interviews Obama Supporters 2012

"Well, we're obviously dealing with a whole population that doesn't listen to the newscasts or read a newspaper,"


It's sad that we let just anyone vote.  These Obamabots cancel out legit, knowledgeable voters.
0
 
beetosCommented:
Howard Stern?

We'll I've got to give you credit for improving your media sources from places like Fox!
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
The real question here, Beetos, is if Obama's doing so well, as you think, why is he NOT up by 20 points in the polls?
0
 
beetosCommented:
Conservative media bias.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>Conservative media bias.

Yeah, the 1% they dominate.


Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone
Protester outside of Romney rally explains how Obama gives all minorities free phones and that is why they should vote for him. Cleveland Ohio, September 26, 2012
0
 
Anthony PerkinsCommented:
EricCars do you realize how stupid that comment makes you look?  As suggested previously, all you are doing is convincing undecided voters to vote Democrat.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>EricCars do you realize how stupid that comment makes you look?  

Which one?  I make a lot of stupid comments.  

About time you came back.
0
 
Anthony PerkinsCommented:
I am sorry I was on vacation for two weeks in the UK.  As an aside, it is surprising how clear the US political situation can be seen from there and specifically the electoral outcome.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>As an aside, it is surprising how clear the US political situation can be seen from there and specifically the electoral outcome.

I would imagine a socialized Europe would put a perspective on things.  Just be glad you didn't have to get an MRI while there - you'd been there for a long time waiting.
0
 
Anthony PerkinsCommented:
I see.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
>>I see.

Nevertheless, glad to see you back and hope you had a good vacation.
0
 
EricLynnWrightAuthor Commented:
Any ideas on how this fine young lady was able to get off of work to attend this rally?  She must have generous employer.

Obama Phone Video
Obama Phone Lady
0

Featured Post

Get your problem seen by more experts

Be seen. Boost your question’s priority for more expert views and faster solutions

  • 24
  • 21
  • 6
  • +3
Tackle projects and never again get stuck behind a technical roadblock.
Join Now