Did Romneyshambles just lose the election?

[comic boy]

As I have mentioned before, a good indicator of the truth of most matters is to accept the opposite of what Phatscotty proposes.

[john9blue]

lol scotty, you kinda got exposed in this thread

[stahrgazer]

And why will you be voting for Obama?

Many reasons. In general, I consider myself socially liberal and fiscally conservative. President Obama wins hands down on the first point. Republicans, once upon a time, used to win the second point. Now they just seem greedy... wanting to keep all they can while they abandon the government and make no attempts to pay down the deficit. I'd at least have some respect for them if they wanted to trim the government in order to pay down our debt... but they are no longer fiscally responsible... they're just looking to slash government in order to pocket money at a time when they need to make sacrifices for the betterment of the country.

Agree with you here, MP, although I'm not that socially liberal. For me, Obama made a serious error on the question of illegal immigration that almost cost him my vote, because I was swinging back to my party.

Romney's statement insulting those who can't f*n AFFORD to pay taxes... forgetting that many don't NOW because the prior regimes changed things so that the Romneys of the world were easily able to buy up companies, "laid off" Americans and shipped those jobs overseas to pad their own pockets, and not pay the percentage on their wealth that the people they laid off used to have to pay as a percentage of THEIR earnings...

I'm not on welfare. From time to time, I've been on unemployment, but not for long, I worked when I could get work and year before last I made a total of $3k, more than half of which was wages and the other half was the pittance they called "emergency unemployment" so I didn't pay any income taxes. I didn't qualify for foodstamps, though, because I (and a bank) own a house.

I'll add, MY job didn't disappear when Obama got elected, my job disappeared when Bush was about to get RE-elected, so I've had eight years of struggle, sometimes paying taxes, sometimes not.

At some point I'll get whammed badly for taxes and penalties because in order to keep that house payment up, I had to borrow from my 401k, and I'm not making enough now to cover bills and repay that 401k loan, which means I'll owe taxes and a penalty.

Do I expect something from my government? DAMN'd RIGHT I DO! I expect my government to work things so that businessmen who began their businesses in this country can't get theirs then say, "F U me and my money are outta here!" If i vote for Romney, I'd be voting for the types who think it's just fine and dandy to put personal selfishness above a little patriotism.

Do I believe there are those who scam the system, because they're functional and choose not to be? Yeah, unfortunately, I believe there are those types out there. It's not 47%, though. Most of that 47% Romney thinks are so horrid are people like me: who'd like to have a job, if only the Romneys of the world didn't sell jobs out to China, India, Mexico, Viet Nam, or wherever else they find people who work for 2 cents an hour to make products the Romneys of the world then turn around and sell for hundreds of dollars in the good ol' USA.

I prefer companies like New Balance. They make a good product up there in New England... they're doing their best not to sell out their labor force and their country by sending those jobs overseas.

The CEO of New Balance doesn't have to squawk about paying too many taxes; his personal profit is low because he's spending most of his income on payroll.

Hmm. That's a thought. Avoid more income taxes by reducing profit slightly by employing more people who would then pay their 30% income taxes compared to your 15% income taxes. Wow, what an idea!

So did Romney lose the election because of this? If only I believed it were true.

From before he took office, Republicans have made "make Obama fail" their number one aim, ahead of anything the country needed, but many are too blind to see who that has hurt.

[Phatscotty]

He just keeps fucking up, doesn't he?

Actually, no. The media just keeps editing comments to make them fit their agenda, and making you believe that he keeps fucking up.

The Romney tape is not authentic. What do ya know...cheating again

Huh, a fringe belief that even the Romney campaign haven't argued. So, if Romney says he said it and it's authentic, and everyone else says it's authentic, but you don't think it's authentic, you're on a bit of limb here Scotty.

If Romney said it's authentic himself, you'd have to present some pretty convincing evidence to the contrary, Phatscotty. I'd love to see such evidence, surely you can point me in the direction of the person, newspaper, TV station or blog or whatever that unearthed it.

Mitt still loses though right? This is the point...it doesn't even matter if I can present the evidence or not, or if the tape is edited or unedited, authentic or not. "Mitt Romney Loses" headlines have already been blared all across the nation, and this particular piece of bullshit has matriculated down very deep into the sheeple mind, and this lie will join the ranks of previous big lies of the Obama media, like Sandra Fluke, Trayvon Martin, and Jared Loughner.

Oh yeah, the evidence...
Mitt Romney Missing Video: 'One To Two Minutes' Of Candidates' Remarks Omitted
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/1 ... tions-2012

Mystery over gap in secret tapes of Mitt Romney's '47 per cent' fundraiser
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... l?ITO=1490

Two Minutes Are Missing in Romney's 47% Video
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics ... -47/57023/

Would the poll results be the same if the truth were known up front and the voters were not deceived?

[size=85]**Greekdog disclaimer: This is an observation and documentation of the Leftist media

[The Bison King]

Yeah cause those 2 missing minutes assuredly justified his comments and aren't just 2 minutes of the same bullshit.

[Night Strike]

Do I expect something from my government? DAMN'd RIGHT I DO! I expect my government to work things so that businessmen who began their businesses in this country can't get theirs then say, "F U me and my money are outta here!" If i vote for Romney, I'd be voting for the types who think it's just fine and dandy to put personal selfishness above a little patriotism.

The only thing that any person should be expecting from the government is our Constitutional rights. And since you don't have a constitutional right to a paycheck, you shouldn't be expecting that from the government. Furthermore, you should actually look to the reasons why businesses move overseas, not just decry it as evil. They move because the cost of doing business in the US is simply way too high. The US has the most productive workforce in the world, but that productivity can't always make up for the ever-expanding list of taxes and regulations that make it harder to actually run the productive business. And to decry rich people like Romney as putting "personal selfishness" above everything is idiotic. EVERY person who takes a deduction in their taxes puts their own personal desires over "being patriotic". It's not just the "rich" who do it. And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt while at the same time lying to us by promising not to monetize that debt in order to destroy our currency? It's time to get with reality.

[The Bison King]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

[Night Strike]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

Cutting taxes doesn't put you in debt. Spending more than you take in puts you in debt.

[The Bison King]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

Cutting taxes doesn't put you in debt. Spending more than you take in puts you in debt.

Ok, like starting 2 wars.

[Woodruff]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

Cutting taxes doesn't put you in debt. Spending more than you take in puts you in debt.

You keep saying this, but it ignores the reality of the situation. Cutting taxes absolutely CAN put you into debt. Cutting taxes doesn't happen in a vacuum (although you tried to pretend the rest of his sentence didn't exist).

[Phatscotty]

Just a reminder. Bush has not been president for 4 years, but Democrats have run Congress for the last 6. Whatever Bush did, good or bad, nothing can be changed about it. It's in the past.

All Bush is good for is pinning the tail on the elephant. But there is no value there, unless people are being controlled and manipulated by their fears....hmmmmmm

[Woodruff]

All Bush is good for is pinning the tail on the elephant. But there is no value there, unless people are being controlled and manipulated by their fears....hmmmmmm

Hmmm is right...you've bought into the politics of fear completely. You're all-in. You're even voting by your fear. Lose the fear, Phatscotty...stand up for what you believe in instead of being controlled and manipulated by your fears.

[GreecePwns]

He is standing up for what he believes in. He truly believes that anyone, literally anyone would be better than Obama. Which is why he is voting for Obama's policies* with a different face and rhetoric.

Now that is change we can all believe in

It's simple really. The marketing buzzwords in Republican speeches appeal more to Phatscotty than the marketing buzzwords in Democratic speeches do because Phatscotty falls more in line with Republican target demographics.

Just like Apple laptops, whose marketing buzzwords and commercial designs appeal more to hip teens who wish to show their individuality by buying the same laptop everyone else in their demographic has, wouldn't appeal as much to a 65 year old who just wants to play solitaire or a rich businessman who seeks an OS with any sort of compatibility with programs. In the end though, both Apple and Windows are not open and in fact are very restrictive of individual rights, but will collude to prevent any sort of competition when it matters.

Republican speeches = Windows.
Democratic speeches = Apple.
Everyone else = Linux.

You can get anyone to believe anything simply by using the right colors/words/sounds. That's the only reason "marketing" firms thrive.

*Or, at the very least, a list of policies with less than 10 differences from Obama's, since no one has come up with 10 of them yet.

Edited numerous times to get the point across.

[john9blue]

Republican speeches = Windows. Democratic speeches = Apple. Everyone else = Linux.

this is actually a really good analogy lol

[Phatscotty]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

helluva dodge you got there...

What is wrong with dealing with the problems of today? And what does bringing up the problems of 6-8 years ago achieve?

[Phatscotty]

.....Phatscotty has more in common with Republicans than Democrats.

HOLY SHIT! YOU SOLVED THE MYSTERY!

[GreecePwns]

As usual you missed the point, but I'll spell it out for ya.

You agree with Republican marketing more than Democratic marketing. You agree with neither party's policy. This is by design, both parties know their policies are similar. They take very different target demographics partly to beat each other and gain power, party to prevent competition from others. Your vote for either a Democrat or Republican doesn't matter; your vote for anyone else over the two does.

[Timminz]

I don't understand why you all keep chastising Scott for his support of Romney, he's already told us that he won't be voting for him.

For the record, I am not voting for Romney.

[aad0906]

And if you want to talk about being patriotic, why aren't you getting on to the government who is doing the completely unpatriotic thing of spending us into never-ending debt

Oh I get it! Like the way George W. Bush spent us into a never ending debt by starting 2 wars and cutting taxes? good point.

helluva dodge you got there...

What is wrong with dealing with the problems of today? And what does bringing up the problems of 6-8 years ago achieve?

Both wars created debt which is still part of today's debt, it hasn't disappeared. Interest is still being paid for it. Both wars also continued to cost money duirng Obama's presidency. Even after ending them they will continue to cost money (care & benefits for 10,000's of wounded soldiers).

Spending more than you take in puts you in debt.

exactly, so reducing what you take in indeed puts you in debt even more. And don't start that by lowering taxes for high earners/companies you create jobs because you don't (I do think lowering taxes for the middle class stimulates spending and thus the economy). The number of jobs is determined by the demand for services and goods. Companies that make more profit because of lowered taxes aren't suddenly becoming charities and start hiring employees that aren't really needed for increased production. Just look at a company like GE that doesn't pay any taxes but nevertheless reduced it's US workforce and increased it's workforce overseas.

[Woodruff]

Republican speeches = Windows.
Democratic speeches = Apple.
Everyone else = Linux.

Gary Johnson = Unix. (Seriously.)

[Woodruff]

I don't understand why you all keep chastising Scott for his support of Romney, he's already told us that he won't be voting for him.

For the record, I am not voting for Romney.

Ignoring that he has provided OVERWHELMING SUPPORT for Romney in this forum, he has both stated he will vote for Romney and stated that he will not vote for Romney. It's really quite remarkable.

[thegreekdog]

As usual you missed the point, but I'll spell it out for ya.

You agree with Republican marketing more than Democratic marketing. You agree with neither party's policy. This is by design, both parties know their policies are similar. They take very different target demographics partly to beat each other and gain power, party to prevent competition from others. Your vote for either a Democrat or Republican doesn't matter; your vote for anyone else over the two does.

This is a great explanation of political parties.

[GreecePwns]

Thought I'd resurrect this thread partly because of BBS' post on Median Voter Theorem, and partly to answer the thread's title.

I know I should be compiling information from more than one polling group, but it appears that the 47% comment will be what buries his chances, though the perceived success of the DNC (especially relative to the RNC) is what really sparked Obama's commanding lead. Previous polls had Obama in a certainly assailable lead with a major gaffe or uncontrollable downturn in the economy/foreign policy, but now it seems all but decided.

[Night Strike]

Yep, just keep believing those polls that are oversampling Democrats by 7-12%, which is more than their advantage in the 2008 election. Also, maybe if the media weren't so biased and would actually report the news of the cover-up in Libya, the breaking of the law by the HHS secretary, and the gaffes of Obama saying he can't change Washington from inside and thinking Libya is just a bump-in-the-road, Obama wouldn't be "winning" as much as perceived.

[Symmetry]

Yep, just keep believing those polls that are oversampling Democrats by 7-12%, which is more than their advantage in the 2008 election. Also, maybe if the media weren't so biased and would actually report the news of the cover-up in Libya, the breaking of the law by the HHS secretary, and the gaffes of Obama saying he can't change Washington from inside and thinking Libya is just a bump-in-the-road, Obama wouldn't be "winning" as much as perceived.

Huh, the Fox news polls also show a significant lead for Obama. Is Fox now part of the liberal conspiracy?