Never-fail prediction system shows 2012 win for Obama

[Mustang]

You have GOT to be shitting us.

EVERY politician does that... makes promises when they know they have no control over the ultimate outcome. You've never heard of campaign promises? You seriously think politicians have control over the ultimate outcomes of the promises they make in order to get elected?

That statement is so utterly stupid, it goes in my sig for the moment. Thanks!

I'm not talking about campaign promises. I'm talking about promises with numbers attached to them. For example, no politician in office is going to promise that gas is never going to go above X dollars per gallon while they're in office because they know they don't (and can't) control the price of oil. Of course, Bachmann does seem to be an exception in that regard since she recently made some kind of pledge that gas would go to $2.00 per gallon if and when she was elected. But again, that's a campaign promise and not a promise made after being elected.

Obama promised to cut the deficit in half in his first term. You want me to post the Youtube video? How is that not a promise with a number attached?

Bachmann is a moron. Anyway, how does her promise differ from Obama's?

Answer: It doesn't

Thanks for playing.

Wasn't that based on his budget passing? And didn't both his administration and the CBO run the numbers that actually showed that the pledge to cut the deficit in half was accurate based on those numbers and projections?

Thanks for playing.

Defending his budget at a news conference on March 24, President Barack Obama repeated his claim that his plan would cut the deficit in half in five years.

"Both under our estimates and under the CBO estimates, both the most conservative estimates out there, we drive down the deficit over the first five years of our budget," Obama said. "The deficit is cut in half. And folks aren't disputing that."

Earlier in the news conference, Obama said he'd cut the deficit in half by the end of his first term. So we'll look at the picture from four and five years out.

According to projections in the Obama administration's proposed budget , released at the end of February, the yearly deficit would go from $1.75 trillion in 2009 to $533 billion in 2013 and $570 billion in 2014. So obviously, by the administration's estimation, the deficit would be cut well more than half whether you measure it until the end of Obama's first term (four years), or five years out.

The Congressional Budget Office projections — released a month later — were not as optimistic. The CBO, a nonpartisan arm of Congress, projected the 2009 deficit at $1.8 trillion, and forecast it would taper down to $672 billion in 2013, then to $749 billion in 2014. Still, even those numbers support Obama's assertion that he'd halve the deficit.

PolitiFact | Obama promises to cut the deficit in half in four years

 

[Salt Jones]

I already know Obama is going to win. The Republican money and leaders know he's going to win, but they have got to run somebody. They want to keep republican turnout at a level where they make gains in the senate and house.

 

[Salt Jones]

It is a long way until Nov 2012. Anything can happen. These types of predictions are a waste of time. Let's see what happens once the Reps have a nomi
nee.

It's math, not predictions. I can predict the amount of radiation I may expose someone to down to the mrem. You know how?

With formulas and math.

 

[SFC Ollie]

That's not a scandal. it's not even in poor taste. This:

Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq - YouTube

Was in poor taste.

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.

you will have to excuse me for not playing along

First of all, NO politician will ever make a promise when they know they have no control over the ultimate outcome. That's why Obama didn't make that promise.

Secondly, any manufacturing plant that make window cleaner can theoretically be used to make "chemical" weapons, even if it's only Black Flag bug spray.

I really don't say this very often, but you are an idiot.

 

[Conservative]

Wasn't that based on his budget passing? And didn't both his administration and the CBO run the numbers that actually showed that the pledge to cut the deficit in half was accurate based on those numbers and projections?

Thanks for playing.

So, his promise... wasn't 'really' a promise.

It was a 'Well, IF this happens, and SHOULD this occur, I MAY be able to cut the deficit in half in my 1st term'.

That is the most pathetic excuse for an excuse I have seen on this board. You should be ashamed of yourself.

 

[SFC Ollie]

That's not a scandal. it's not even in poor taste. This:

Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq - YouTube

Was in poor taste.

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.


you will have to excuse me for not playing along

Go peddle that bullshit to someone that will believe it. Bush took us to war due to the threat of WMDs. Or do you forget the "do you want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud......" quote from Condi? If any whiff of "WMDs" were found, the Bush supporters would have screamed it from the mountain tops. There wasn't even enough material found to make a plausible cover story. Instead, we have been told the "WMDs" were probably smuggled into Syria.

The most sacred trust the President has is in his decision to commit Americans to war. To get support for this in Iraq, Bush had to demonstrate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. Hence the focus on the WMDs. He would have never had the support of the congress and American people without a tie to American security.

It wasn't until the whole WMD thing turned out to be a bust that the mission became about "spreading democracy".

Actually Bush stated that freeing the people of Iraq was a one of the primary reasons for going in. He said that when he announced to the country that the war had started...

Also The final report if you would read it tells us that the inspectors found that most factories were set up so that they could easily and quickly converted to produce WMD. This was a very well planned set up, It was believed that Saddam was simply waiting for the inspectors to leave and sanctions to be lifted.

 

[Conservative]

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.


you will have to excuse me for not playing along

Go peddle that bullshit to someone that will believe it. Bush took us to war due to the threat of WMDs. Or do you forget the "do you want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud......" quote from Condi? If any whiff of "WMDs" were found, the Bush supporters would have screamed it from the mountain tops. There wasn't even enough material found to make a plausible cover story. Instead, we have been told the "WMDs" were probably smuggled into Syria.

The most sacred trust the President has is in his decision to commit Americans to war. To get support for this in Iraq, Bush had to demonstrate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. Hence the focus on the WMDs. He would have never had the support of the congress and American people without a tie to American security.

It wasn't until the whole WMD thing turned out to be a bust that the mission became about "spreading democracy".

Actually Bush stated that freeing the people of Iraq was a one of the primary reasons for going in. He said that when he announced to the country that the war had started...

Also The final report if you would read it tells us that the inspectors found that most factories were set up so that they could easily and quickly converted to produce WMD. This was a very well planned set up, It was believed that Saddam was simply waiting for the inspectors to leave and sanctions to be lifted.

Pearls before swine, Ollie... pearls before swine.

 

[Salt Jones]

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.


you will have to excuse me for not playing along

Go peddle that bullshit to someone that will believe it. Bush took us to war due to the threat of WMDs. Or do you forget the "do you want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud......" quote from Condi? If any whiff of "WMDs" were found, the Bush supporters would have screamed it from the mountain tops. There wasn't even enough material found to make a plausible cover story. Instead, we have been told the "WMDs" were probably smuggled into Syria.

The most sacred trust the President has is in his decision to commit Americans to war. To get support for this in Iraq, Bush had to demonstrate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. Hence the focus on the WMDs. He would have never had the support of the congress and American people without a tie to American security.

It wasn't until the whole WMD thing turned out to be a bust that the mission became about "spreading democracy".

Actually Bush stated that freeing the people of Iraq was a one of the primary reasons for going in. He said that when he announced to the country that the war had started...

Also The final report if you would read it tells us that the inspectors found that most factories were set up so that they could easily and quickly converted to produce WMD. This was a very well planned set up, It was believed that Saddam was simply waiting for the inspectors to leave and sanctions to be lifted.

Sure he was. Ever hear of the Project for the New American Century?

Read some of their old stuff on Iraq and checkout the members.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/

 

[SFC Ollie]

Wasn't that based on his budget passing? And didn't both his administration and the CBO run the numbers that actually showed that the pledge to cut the deficit in half was accurate based on those numbers and projections?

Thanks for playing.

So, his promise... wasn't 'really' a promise.

It was a 'Well, IF this happens, and SHOULD this occur, I MAY be able to cut the deficit in half in my 1st term'.

That is the most pathetic excuse for an excuse I have seen on this board. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Didn't he control the House and Senate for the first 2 years? What happened?

 

[Conservative]

Wasn't that based on his budget passing? And didn't both his administration and the CBO run the numbers that actually showed that the pledge to cut the deficit in half was accurate based on those numbers and projections?

Thanks for playing.

So, his promise... wasn't 'really' a promise.

It was a 'Well, IF this happens, and SHOULD this occur, I MAY be able to cut the deficit in half in my 1st term'.

That is the most pathetic excuse for an excuse I have seen on this board. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Didn't he control the House and Senate for the first 2 years? What happened?

He lied.

 

[Avatar4321]

Apparently it has been six since he made the formula. But it the formula is applied to each presidency prior, it still works.

No scandals?


yeah

What about his family members that are here illegally?

joking it up about 'shovel ready not being so shovel ready'?

A fucking Peace Prize and we are bombing more places the Bush ever considered?

That's what I was saying about the scandals. I guess this guy does not think handing weapons to drug cartels is scandal worthy.

He could simply be ignorant of it. The media has been doing what they can to avoid it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Six trials hardly makes any system "never fail".

6 in a row is nothing to scoff at.

Yeah, its amazing that he was able to predict that SCOTUS would hijack and change the election result in 2000.

At no point did Al Gore ever have a lead in the 2000 election. How could the SCOTUS have changed the election results?

 

[The Rabbi]

I already know Obama is going to win. The Republican money and leaders know he's going to win, but they have got to run somebody. They want to keep republican turnout at a level where they make gains in the senate and house.

Really? How do you think he will win with a record like his, longest sustained unemployment since the Great Depression. Blaming it on Bush won't work this time. He owns the unemployment rate. He has been flailing around for 3 years promising a "laser like focus on jobs" and has delivered a miserably failed stimulus and not much else.
Many of the states he won he did so by only a 2% margin. How will he possibly carry them again?

 

[Avatar4321]

First of all, NO politician will ever make a promise when they know they have no control over the ultimate outcome. That's why Obama didn't make that promise.

That is blatantly false in both regards and very poor logic.

 

[Avatar4321]

That's not a scandal. it's not even in poor taste. This:

Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq - YouTube

Was in poor taste.

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.


you will have to excuse me for not playing along

Go peddle that bullshit to someone that will believe it. Bush took us to war due to the threat of WMDs. Or do you forget the "do you want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud......" quote from Condi? If any whiff of "WMDs" were found, the Bush supporters would have screamed it from the mountain tops. There wasn't even enough material found to make a plausible cover story. Instead, we have been told the "WMDs" were probably smuggled into Syria.

The most sacred trust the President has is in his decision to commit Americans to war. To get support for this in Iraq, Bush had to demonstrate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. Hence the focus on the WMDs. He would have never had the support of the congress and American people without a tie to American security.

It wasn't until the whole WMD thing turned out to be a bust that the mission became about "spreading democracy".

WMDs was one of a number of factors for the liberation of Iraq.

 

[Avatar4321]

It is a long way until Nov 2012. Anything can happen. These types of predictions are a waste of time. Let's see what happens once the Reps have a nomi
nee.

Let's see what happens when the Dems have a nominee too. It's still early enough for someone to challenge Obama...

 

[Avatar4321]

I already know Obama is going to win. The Republican money and leaders know he's going to win, but they have got to run somebody. They want to keep republican turnout at a level where they make gains in the senate and house.

And how did you become privy to this knowledge?

 

[The Rabbi]

10.1% UE when he promised never over 8%.
vs
we found tons of bombs, some uranium, and the machines to makes all sorts of chemical/biological weapons but not specifically wmd's.


you will have to excuse me for not playing along

Go peddle that bullshit to someone that will believe it. Bush took us to war due to the threat of WMDs. Or do you forget the "do you want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud......" quote from Condi? If any whiff of "WMDs" were found, the Bush supporters would have screamed it from the mountain tops. There wasn't even enough material found to make a plausible cover story. Instead, we have been told the "WMDs" were probably smuggled into Syria.

The most sacred trust the President has is in his decision to commit Americans to war. To get support for this in Iraq, Bush had to demonstrate that Iraq was a threat to the security of the United States. Hence the focus on the WMDs. He would have never had the support of the congress and American people without a tie to American security.

It wasn't until the whole WMD thing turned out to be a bust that the mission became about "spreading democracy".

WMDs was one of a number of factors for the liberation of Iraq.

Do we need to repost all the quotes from Democrats from Bill Clinton on down that Saddam had WMD and something needed to be done?

 

[Big Fitz]

That's what I was saying about the scandals. I guess this guy does not think handing weapons to drug cartels is scandal worthy.

Or maybe he has a complicit and compliant media, perfectly willing to bury his turds for him.

Oh no... this isn't about the submissive cat burying the turds of the dominant one. This is more the coprophagous dog of the media eating his turds because they're tasty.

 

[uscitizen]

Wasn't that based on his budget passing? And didn't both his administration and the CBO run the numbers that actually showed that the pledge to cut the deficit in half was accurate based on those numbers and projections?

Thanks for playing.

So, his promise... wasn't 'really' a promise.

It was a 'Well, IF this happens, and SHOULD this occur, I MAY be able to cut the deficit in half in my 1st term'.

That is the most pathetic excuse for an excuse I have seen on this board. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Didn't he control the House and Senate for the first 2 years? What happened?

Umm the finiancial industry was not done raping America.

but is we elect Bachman we will be up to our noses in new oil in a few months and Gas will be $2/gal.