Gallup: 55% Oppose Re-election of Obama

[samjones]

2. "Women don't understand..."
Consider the rest of this post as a cautionary tale for other misogynists.

3. "...there's a difference between not liking a candidate and thinking that the candidate is a weak candidate."
Obama has seen his poll number fall with every single constituent group. In his case, likeability is no longer a factor. He is recognized by all as a fake and pompous incompetent.
Any GOP candidate will defeat him.

4. "Men watch alot of sports ..."
Just this week: Survey shows liberals and conservatives watch different TV shows too... Jon Stewart and Larry the Cable Guy are the new faces American polarization | Mail Online
Actually, conservatives favor competition, such as sports, in their viewing habits.

This is the problem. I say that men watch alot of sports and she argues that conservatives watch sports as often as liberals. Like that's any kind of response to what I said. This woman has a basic misunderstanding of political affiliation as it relates to gender.

What you've managed to say is that you hate Barack Obama. I get it. I think we all get it.

The problem is that the Republicans are not going to field a candidate that can win the Office of President. They don't settle elections by calling people on the phone and asking them how they like the incumbent. They settle elections at the polling booth and nobody is going to make a special trip for Mitt Romney.

This is the part you don't grasp.

In my adult life I've watched 3 presidents gain reelection and even without considering his opposition I like Obama's chances better than 2 of them. Considering his opposition helps alot, but this Republic field is by far the worst field of presidential candidates I've ever seen fielded by a party. It makes me wonder about the future of the party.

 

[PoliticalChic]

2. "Women don't understand..."
Consider the rest of this post as a cautionary tale for other misogynists.

3. "...there's a difference between not liking a candidate and thinking that the candidate is a weak candidate."
Obama has seen his poll number fall with every single constituent group. In his case, likeability is no longer a factor. He is recognized by all as a fake and pompous incompetent.
Any GOP candidate will defeat him.

4. "Men watch alot of sports ..."
Just this week: Survey shows liberals and conservatives watch different TV shows too... Jon Stewart and Larry the Cable Guy are the new faces American polarization | Mail Online
Actually, conservatives favor competition, such as sports, in their viewing habits.

This is the problem. I say that men watch alot of sports and she argues that conservatives watch sports as often as liberals. Like that's any kind of response to what I said. This woman has a basic misunderstanding of political affiliation as it relates to gender.

What you've managed to say is that you hate Barack Obama. I get it. I think we all get it.

The problem is that the Republicans are not going to field a candidate that can win the Office of President. They don't settle elections by calling people on the phone and asking them how they like the incumbent. They settle elections at the polling booth and nobody is going to make a special trip for Mitt Romney.

This is the part you don't grasp.

In my adult life I've watched 3 presidents gain reelection and even without considering his opposition I like Obama's chances better than 2 of them. Considering his opposition helps alot, but this Republic field is by far the worst field of presidential candidates I've ever seen fielded by a party. It makes me wonder about the future of the party.

"What you've managed to say is that you hate Barack Obama. I get it. I think we all get it."

Two errors in one line! What consistency, Sammy!
1. I don't hate Obama...but I certainly have distain for a political philosophy that has resulted in 100 million slaughtered in the last century...
...and I do think that those who continue to support the Leftist doctine are dangerous.
It is hardly a personal opinion vis-a-vis Obama.

In fact, I love the Tyrannosaurus rex impression he does when he jogs down the steps of Airforce One. You know, when he pulls his little arms in?

2. The second error is the so- liberal "we"...you shouldn't try to extend your lack of understanding to everyone else.

3. "The problem is that the Republicans are not going to field a candidate that can win..."
Your problem is that you have been blinded by...did you attend government schools?...misdirection!
The choice is not a candidate, it's about the future of America:
A. Income equality, economic central planning, global governance under worldwide socialism.

B. Equality before the law, free market capitalism, the United States Constitution.

The 'misdirection' is to have the less astute look for the little things...as when the press passed on bon mots like, 'Kerry will win...the taller candidate always does."
They already got you, didn't they?

4. " this Republic field is by far the worst field of presidential candidates I've ever seen fielded by a party."
Since you've seen other elections, I'm somewhat surprised that you fail to recognize the same Left-wing Democrat carping: "they're dumb....worst candidates ever!"

Gets old.

Try to see the bigger picture, Sammy.....what made America 'the shining city on the hill'...and compare that to what this Obama guy represents.


Get it? Not the guy....what he represents.

 

[samjones]

3. "The problem is that the Republicans are not going to field a candidate that can win..."
Your problem is that you have been blinded by...did you attend government schools?...misdirection!
The choice is not a candidate, it's about the future of America:

While you're ranting about the future of America, the people who matter that day will be in the polls choosing a candidate.

They will not be choosing a Republican and you will not have learned anything from that experience. If you want to get elected then I recommend you do 2 things.

1. Be electable
2. Raise money

Your Republican candidates can't do both and in most cases seem to not be able to either.

 

[PoliticalChic]

3. "The problem is that the Republicans are not going to field a candidate that can win..."
Your problem is that you have been blinded by...did you attend government schools?...misdirection!
The choice is not a candidate, it's about the future of America:

While you're ranting about the future of America, the people who matter that day will be in the polls choosing a candidate.

They will not be choosing a Republican and you will not have learned anything from that experience. If you want to get elected then I recommend you do 2 things.

1. Be electable
2. Raise money

Your Republican candidates can't do both and in most cases seem to not be able to either.

1. So, the take-away from your post is that only today matters...tomorrow will take care of itself?
Excellent!

One of the most significant....arguably the prime...difference between liberals and conservetives, is exactly that outlook

2. Adults plan for the future...children, or those adults saddled with a childish view of the world, not so much.
Guess in which category you have placed yourself.

3.An important example or two of the the problems that result from an only-today-counts outlook:

a. FDR authorized Social Security. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.
i. No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
ii. No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
iii. No one calculated the long-term costs?
iv. Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security Online

b. FDR, progressive-on-steroids, also authorized Fannie and Freddie, GSE's and continued and worsened by Carter and Clinton....all based on defeating the free market basis for home ownership. None considered that folks who couldn't get loans without the government pressuring banks to give said loans might default tomorrow.
Result: worldwide financial meltdown.

See what happens when you fail to consider the future?

4. Now, Sammy...just a word about style. You write "While you're ranting about the future of America..."
rant means to speak or shout at length in a wild, impassioned way.

Your meaning casts my 'rant' in a pejorative light. Do you really wish to suggest that one should not be impassioned about the future of the 'last great hope of mankind' (in the words of the great man)?

Let me suggest a better way to make your point:
"Rather than discussing the future of America, at this time, it is more immediate to concenetrate onthe people who matter that day will be in the polls choosing a candidate first. After the election it will be appropriate....and so on..."


Now, if you are convinced that the future matters....

... your choices are:
A. Income equality, economic central planning, global governance under worldwide socialism.

B. Equality before the law, free market capitalism, the United States Constitution.

 

[Listening]

While you're ranting about the future of America, the people who matter that day will be in the polls choosing a candidate.

They will not be choosing a Republican and you will not have learned anything from that experience. If you want to get elected then I recommend you do 2 things.

1. Be electable
2. Raise money

Your Republican candidates can't do both and in most cases seem to not be able to either.

Yeah,

We did get wiped out in 2010, didn't we ?

 

[samjones]

Now, if you are convinced that the future matters....

... your choices are:
A. Income equality, economic central planning, global governance under worldwide socialism.

B. Equality before the law, free market capitalism, the United States Constitution.

See, no. See, I vote and when I'm going to go into the poll I"m going to have these choices:

A. Barack Obama, the sitting President of the United States

B. The loser on the Republican Ticket that the lady on the Internet keeps ranting on and on about

I'll take the non-Nutjob candidate, thanks much.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Now, if you are convinced that the future matters....

... your choices are:
A. Income equality, economic central planning, global governance under worldwide socialism.

B. Equality before the law, free market capitalism, the United States Constitution.

See, no. See, I vote and when I'm going to go into the poll I"m going to have these choices:

A. Barack Obama, the sitting President of the United States

B. The loser on the Republican Ticket that the lady on the Internet keeps ranting on and on about

I'll take the non-Nutjob candidate, thanks much.

Don't fret, Sammy...the adults will save you, and the nation.

It'll give you the time to grow up.

 

[samjones]

3.An important example or two of the the problems that result from an only-today-counts outlook:

a. FDR authorized Social Security. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.
i. No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
ii. No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
iii. No one calculated the long-term costs?
iv. Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security Online

i., ii., iii..... Do you really think that no one does? Do you really not grasp that people receive advanced degrees and make careers out of concerning themselves with that exact question?

iv. So what? She got a good deal. It's unenlightened at best - probably more likely hyperbolic - to consider the merits of a massive government program based on the experience of a single individual over 60 years ago....

You and the Republic Presidential Candidates are about the same. Simple-minded anecdote is about the best you have to offer. The American people will choose the candidate who can actually offer ideas about how to save social security.

 

[PoliticalChic]

3.An important example or two of the the problems that result from an only-today-counts outlook:

a. FDR authorized Social Security. The Social Security plan was that workers would pay for retirees, and, based on actuarial tables, those who died earlier than expected would add to the fund.
i. No one considered that life expectancy would increase?
ii. No one considered that the balance of workers and retirees might change?
iii. No one calculated the long-term costs?
iv. Ida May Fuller, the first person to begin receiving benefits, in January, 1940, when she was 65- she lived to be 100. “…worked for three years under the Social Security program. The accumulated taxes on her salary during those three years was a total of $24.75. Her initial monthly check was $22.54. During her lifetime she collected a total of $22,888.92 in Social Security benefits.” Social Security Online

i., ii., iii..... Do you really think that no one does? Do you really not grasp that people receive advanced degrees and make careers out of concerning themselves with that exact question?

iv. So what? She got a good deal. It's unenlightened at best - probably more likely hyperbolic - to consider the merits of a massive government program based on the experience of a single individual over 60 years ago....

You and the Republic Presidential Candidates are about the same. Simple-minded anecdote is about the best you have to offer. The American people will choose the candidate who can actually offer ideas about how to save social security.

You know, Sammy, when you're this uninformed, it's probably a good idea not to let everyone else know it.


"...Do you really think that no one does?"

Well, FDR and his Progressives didn't, did they?

And since the dangers of insolvency of Social Security is regularly the cause of hand-wringing in Washington and elsewhere, your point is clearly...and I mean this in the kindest way....Stupid!