CanuckInUSA 0 #26 October 4, 2012 Not sure what debate you were watching where Obama was the winner, but surely it was not the same debate everyone else saw. Even Obama's friends in the media are saying today that Romney was the winner. Looks like Clint was right, take away the teleprompter and Obama is an empty chair the way he constantly had to stop mid speech and think "what was it that they told me to say". If Obama actually believed in what he was saying, it would come naturally to him, he would not need to pause and think. Oh and there is absolutely nothing free about Universal Healthcare, unless of course you are one of those people who do not pay any tax for the social welfare state, and if we did share the same country all I could say is "you are welcome". Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1888 0 #27 October 5, 2012 Who pays for the "free" health care? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
airtwardo 7 #28 October 5, 2012 Quote Quote Well currently anyway, the news polling organizations are disagreeing with you and calling it a decisive win for Romney. I agree - Romney was far more smooth with his lies than Obama was with his. Yup...Romney and his delivery had me thinking he must be Reagen & Clinton's love-child. The other thing that kept going through my mind was ~ it's really true, anybody CAN be president! ~ If you choke a Smurf, what color does it turn? ~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #29 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteWell currently anyway, the news polling organizations are disagreeing with you and calling it a decisive win for Romney. I agree - Romney was far more smooth with his lies than Obama was with his. What lies did he tell? or are you and Obama the same, all talk and no facts? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #30 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteWell currently anyway, the news polling organizations are disagreeing with you and calling it a decisive win for Romney. I agree - Romney was far more smooth with his lies than Obama was with his. What lies did he tell? or are you and Obama the same, all talk and no facts? factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/ www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/03/fact-checking-denver-presidential-debate/ Plenty of falsehoods and half-truths to go around.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #31 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteWell currently anyway, the news polling organizations are disagreeing with you and calling it a decisive win for Romney. I agree - Romney was far more smooth with his lies than Obama was with his. What lies did he tell? or are you and Obama the same, all talk and no facts? factcheck.org/2012/10/dubious-denver-debate-declarations/ www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2012/oct/03/fact-checking-denver-presidential-debate/ Plenty of falsehoods and half-truths to go around. After a little reading I find that both are equally wrong at times but I feel that what they were wrong on is important. Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. but either way I'll take a change over what we have. Just the posture of the 2 in the debate would make me not vote for Obama. Our president needs to work, not play golf, vacation, and get pissed off when he is pressured. Our president needs to be positive, energetic, and involved in the workings of government. He shouldn't be missing most of the national security meetings. He should be sitting down with both sides working on comprimises and breaking the deadlock on voting in the senate. this president is lazy and out of touch with congress. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #32 October 5, 2012 >Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #33 October 5, 2012 Quote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #34 October 5, 2012 >So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP >and reduce the deficit at the same time. So he can increase spending, cut taxes and reduce the deficit. Because the GDP will magically rise. Isn't that sort of thinking what got us into this mess to begin with? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #35 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. A quick review of GDP, government revenue and tax rates of the past, say, 30 years indicates that tax rates have very little to do with GDP growth, and a whole lot to do with revenues. It is pie in the sky to believe that cutting tax rates will magically improve GDP and provide revenues to support an increase in defense spending. Maybe if you wear magic underwear...... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #36 October 5, 2012 QuoteMaybe if you wear magic underwear... I wear holey underwear. Is that the same thing? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 803 #37 October 5, 2012 Different thread. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #38 October 5, 2012 Quote Different thread. Different forum even.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #39 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. A quick review of GDP, government revenue and tax rates of the past, say, 30 years indicates that tax rates have very little to do with GDP growth, and a whole lot to do with revenues. It is pie in the sky to believe that cutting tax rates will magically improve GDP and provide revenues to support an increase in defense spending. Maybe if you wear magic underwear... worked before and it would work again. this time with eliminating loopholes there would be less of a drop in revenue and with the lower tax rates it would make the US more competitive on the global market . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #40 October 5, 2012 Quote>So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP >and reduce the deficit at the same time. So he can increase spending, cut taxes and reduce the deficit. Because the GDP will magically rise. Isn't that sort of thinking what got us into this mess to begin with? were did I say "increase spending"? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #41 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. A quick review of GDP, government revenue and tax rates of the past, say, 30 years indicates that tax rates have very little to do with GDP growth, and a whole lot to do with revenues. It is pie in the sky to believe that cutting tax rates will magically improve GDP and provide revenues to support an increase in defense spending. Maybe if you wear magic underwear... worked before and it would work again. Easy to claim, until you look at the data.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,998 #42 October 5, 2012 >were did I say "increase spending"? You didn't; he did. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #43 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. A quick review of GDP, government revenue and tax rates of the past, say, 30 years indicates that tax rates have very little to do with GDP growth, and a whole lot to do with revenues. It is pie in the sky to believe that cutting tax rates will magically improve GDP and provide revenues to support an increase in defense spending. Maybe if you wear magic underwear... worked before and it would work again. Easy to claim, until you look at the data. looks like it works to mehttp://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=2000_2008&view=1&expand=&units=b&fy=fy11&chart=F0-fed&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #44 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. we he is correct to an extent. The projected deficits are based on projected GDP, For every 1% GDP is over the projection it offsets about 1 trillion over ten years due to more tax revenue and less benifits paid to people not working. So Romney can cut tax rates, remove some loop holes, and get an increase in GDP and reduce the deficit at the same time. A quick review of GDP, government revenue and tax rates of the past, say, 30 years indicates that tax rates have very little to do with GDP growth, and a whole lot to do with revenues. It is pie in the sky to believe that cutting tax rates will magically improve GDP and provide revenues to support an increase in defense spending. Maybe if you wear magic underwear... worked before and it would work again. Easy to claim, until you look at the data. looks like it works to mehttp://www.usgovernmentrevenue.com/downchart_gr.php?year=2000_2008&view=1&expand=&units=b&fy=fy11&chart=F0-fed&bar=0&stack=1&size=m&title=&state=US&color=c&local=s Nope. You haven't: 1. Corrected for inflation 2. Corrected for population growth. 3. Compared with the previous 18 year's worth of growth and tax rates (I said look at the last 30 years). 4. Included the last 4 years, when tax rates have been at historic lows.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #45 October 5, 2012 Quote>Romney was wrong on some numbers but he wasn't wrong on the substance. He was truthy. For example, when he said he'd cut taxes but not increase the deficit, while restoring all the budget cuts that Obama made - there's no way mathematically to make that work. But it feels good to say. It feels right in your gut that that charismatic guy can give you everything you ever wanted while taking even less of your hard-earned money. Remember, truth doesn't come from facts, it comes from your gut. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
