Post Convention Bounce

[Dot Com]

When a woman demands that someone else pay for her birth control and abortions and subsidize her promiscuity she has already opened her privacy to the scrutiny of others.

let me know when that happens so i can dial up the appropriate outrage

Now you can go spit on Sandra Fluke and Caroline Kennedy.

I thought this was the CDZ?

Most of obama's chances for reelection are out of his hands. Moody's is considering another downgrade, contractor's are getting ready to send out thousands of lay off notices, Germany has indicated concern about our debt if obama is reelected. Not to even mention that his decision on what he will do about Iran and Israel if Iran should make good on its threats against us. There is a hammer ready to come down on obama. He's hoping it will come down after the election and not before. If it comes down before, his chances will be zero. All the social programs in the world won't save him. None of it is under his control either.

links?

 

[rightwinger]

Now that the conventions have passed, it seems clear that the democrats have gotten a bounce from theirs, while the GOP has not.

Why do you think that is? And do you think it's going to be dispositive of the election outcome.

Reminder: This is the CDZ. Thanks for guiding yourself accordingly.... on both sides of the aisle.

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Now that the conventions have passed, it seems clear that the democrats have gotten a bounce from theirs, while the GOP has not.

Why do you think that is? And do you think it's going to be dispositive of the election outcome.

Reminder: This is the CDZ. Thanks for guiding yourself accordingly.... on both sides of the aisle.

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

He's done that to an extent leaving out some major details like who controlled congress.
The boy is so far over his head
But I digress people were better off before democrats took control of congress.

 

[Ravi]

let me know when that happens so i can dial up the appropriate outrage

Now you can go spit on Sandra Fluke and Caroline Kennedy.

I thought this was the CDZ?

Most of obama's chances for reelection are out of his hands. Moody's is considering another downgrade, contractor's are getting ready to send out thousands of lay off notices, Germany has indicated concern about our debt if obama is reelected. Not to even mention that his decision on what he will do about Iran and Israel if Iran should make good on its threats against us. There is a hammer ready to come down on obama. He's hoping it will come down after the election and not before. If it comes down before, his chances will be zero. All the social programs in the world won't save him. None of it is under his control either.

links?

Apparently disparaging remarks from cons are allowed.

 

[asterism]

Now that the conventions have passed, it seems clear that the democrats have gotten a bounce from theirs, while the GOP has not.

Why do you think that is? And do you think it's going to be dispositive of the election outcome.

Reminder: This is the CDZ. Thanks for guiding yourself accordingly.... on both sides of the aisle.

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Did the Glass-Steagall Act get reinstated? Did the Fed stop printing money? Did interest rates stop getting manipulated? Has government started exercising actual oversight instead of micromanagement and intrusion into the economy?

Those are the policies that messed everything up.

 

[asterism]

Now that the conventions have passed, it seems clear that the democrats have gotten a bounce from theirs, while the GOP has not.

Why do you think that is? And do you think it's going to be dispositive of the election outcome.

Reminder: This is the CDZ. Thanks for guiding yourself accordingly.... on both sides of the aisle.

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

Lower unemployment, less debt, more people working, GM bondholders and creditors taking action to build a better business model....

 

[jillian]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Did the Glass-Steagall Act get reinstated? Did the Fed stop printing money? Did interest rates stop getting manipulated? Has government started exercising actual oversight instead of micromanagement and intrusion into the economy?

Those are the policies that messed everything up.

i agree with you about glass-steagall.

did we stop cutting taxes in time of war and living on china's credit card?

did we restore the money taken from the federal budget?

or are we pretending that tax cuts are 'job creating'?

did we go back to properly regulating banks?

did we put money back into agencies like the SEC that got defunded by the bush administration?

 

[Dot Com]

Most of obama's chances for reelection are out of his hands. Moody's is considering another downgrade, contractor's are getting ready to send out thousands of lay off notices, Germany has indicated concern about our debt if obama is reelected. Not to even mention that his decision on what he will do about Iran and Israel if Iran should make good on its threats against us. There is a hammer ready to come down on obama. He's hoping it will come down after the election and not before. If it comes down before, his chances will be zero. All the social programs in the world won't save him. None of it is under his control either.

how do you fit so much UNSUBSTANTIATED con frustration/hate into one paragraph?

 

[rightwinger]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

He's done that to an extent leaving out some major details like who controlled congress.
The boy is so far over his head
But I digress people were better off before democrats took control of congress.

You will have to point out specific programs passed by the Democratic Congress that caused the economic collapse of 2007-2008

As it is, the voting public blames Bush and the Republicans

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

Lower unemployment, less debt, more people working, GM bondholders and creditors taking action to build a better business model....

Pretty much the way it was. I will add one more to the mix Income hourly average was higher than it is now also.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

He's done that to an extent leaving out some major details like who controlled congress.
The boy is so far over his head
But I digress people were better off before democrats took control of congress.

You will have to point out specific programs passed by the Democratic Congress that caused the economic collapse of 2007-2008

As it is, the voting public blames Bush and the Republicans

The media blamed bush and the public blindly excepted what the media said. But who controlled congress before the collapse?
What was the hourly rate of pay four years ago compared to now?
I'm going to knock that BOUNCE down to a thud in one post.

 

[Wiseacre]

Now that the conventions have passed, it seems clear that the democrats have gotten a bounce from theirs, while the GOP has not.

Why do you think that is? And do you think it's going to be dispositive of the election outcome.

Reminder: This is the CDZ. Thanks for guiding yourself accordingly.... on both sides of the aisle.

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Some might question the assumption that under Romney we would return to the same policies that led to the recession. Those policies were bipartisan and in place long before Bush43 ever took office. If I'm not mistaken he did try to put in some oversight over the Housing situation before the bubble popped, but it got shot down in Congress.

 

[jillian]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

Obama needs to drive home exactly what shape the country was in four years ago

Lower unemployment, less debt, more people working, GM bondholders and creditors taking action to build a better business model....

we were bleeding jobs.
the economy was crashed
banks failing

the debt? that's what happens when you lower taxes and run two wars.

GM thriving now. And the jobs in the supply chain saved.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Some might question the assumption that under Romney we would return to the same policies that led to the recession. Those policies were bipartisan and in place long before Bush43 ever took office. If I'm not mistaken he did try to put in some oversight over the Housing situation before the bubble popped, but it got shot down in Congress.

No you are not mistaken he Bush did.

 

[jillian]

If you think the bounce is great ask those polled are you better off now than you were 4 years ago?

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Some might question the assumption that under Romney we would return to the same policies that led to the recession. Those policies were bipartisan and in place long before Bush43 ever took office. If I'm not mistaken he did try to put in some oversight over the Housing situation before the bubble popped, but it got shot down in Congress.

why would anyone question it. the only things he's specific about is following the bush model.

actually, i don't think you're correct. newt was lobbying for fannie/freddie at the time, so efforts at fixing things got fairly well shut down, unfortunately.

the truth is, the worst bi-partisan action was allowing banks to mix their savings and investment work. that led to the horrible horrible shell game played with housing.

 

[rightwinger]

He's done that to an extent leaving out some major details like who controlled congress.
The boy is so far over his head
But I digress people were better off before democrats took control of congress.

You will have to point out specific programs passed by the Democratic Congress that caused the economic collapse of 2007-2008

As it is, the voting public blames Bush and the Republicans

The media blamed bush and the public blindly excepted what the media said. But who controlled congress before the collapse?
What was the hourly rate of pay four years ago compared to now?
I'm going to knock that BOUNCE down to a thud in one post.

Most polls on the economy blame Bush and the Republican agenda

Blame it on the media if you want. But it is still there

 

[bigrebnc1775]

You will have to point out specific programs passed by the Democratic Congress that caused the economic collapse of 2007-2008

As it is, the voting public blames Bush and the Republicans

The media blamed bush and the public blindly excepted what the media said. But who controlled congress before the collapse?
What was the hourly rate of pay four years ago compared to now?
I'm going to knock that BOUNCE down to a thud in one post.

Most polls on the economy blame Bush and the Republican agenda

Blame it on the media if you want. But it is still there

Who in the hell does most polls? THE MEDIA

 

[Wiseacre]

there's another thread in the CDZ on that question.

but of course things are better now... 4 years ago we were bleeding 750,00 jobs a month, the economy was crashed and the banks were failing.

so the next question is... will returning to those same policies that messed up everything in the first place... be good or bad for us.

Some might question the assumption that under Romney we would return to the same policies that led to the recession. Those policies were bipartisan and in place long before Bush43 ever took office. If I'm not mistaken he did try to put in some oversight over the Housing situation before the bubble popped, but it got shot down in Congress.

why would anyone question it. the only things he's specific about is following the bush model.

actually, i don't think you're correct. newt was lobbying for fannie/freddie at the time, so efforts at fixing things got fairly well shut down, unfortunately.

the truth is, the worst bi-partisan action was allowing banks to mix their savings and investment work. that led to the horrible horrible shell game played with housing.

I don't think Romney has ever said he's following the Bush model, or plans on implmenting the same policies. Some of 'em maybe, the ones that worked. Seems to be a standard dem talking point, but this time there's a Tea Party element in the GOP, and I don't think it's going to be business as usual if Romney is elected.

So what if Newt was lobbying for F&F, it wasn't entirely Bush's fault that the legislation to provide more oversight was killed. Nor was the recession entirely his fault or due to his economic policies. Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Obama vote against that legislation? Some dems supported it, some didn't, depending on their constituencies. But I get tired of the same old rhetoric about blaming the repubs for the recession; it's not true and is pure demagoguery.

Agree about the decision to repeal Glass Steagall, that was big banking lobbying and the repubs were as guilty as the Dems. But that was under Clinton, he's the one that signed the bill to repeal it.

 

[jillian]

Some might question the assumption that under Romney we would return to the same policies that led to the recession. Those policies were bipartisan and in place long before Bush43 ever took office. If I'm not mistaken he did try to put in some oversight over the Housing situation before the bubble popped, but it got shot down in Congress.

why would anyone question it. the only things he's specific about is following the bush model.

actually, i don't think you're correct. newt was lobbying for fannie/freddie at the time, so efforts at fixing things got fairly well shut down, unfortunately.

the truth is, the worst bi-partisan action was allowing banks to mix their savings and investment work. that led to the horrible horrible shell game played with housing.

I don't think Romney has ever said he's following the Bush model, or plans on implmenting the same policies. Some of 'em maybe, the ones that worked. Seems to be a standard dem talking point, but this time there's a Tea Party element in the GOP, and I don't think it's going to be business as usual if Romney is elected.

So what if Newt was lobbying for F&F, it wasn't entirely Bush's fault that the legislation to provide more oversight was killed. Nor was the recession entirely his fault or due to his economic policies. Maybe I'm wrong, but didn't Obama vote against that legislation? Some dems supported it, some didn't, depending on their constituencies. But I get tired of the same old rhetoric about blaming the repubs for the recession; it's not true and is pure demagoguery.

Agree about the decision to repeal Glass Steagall, that was big banking lobbying and the repubs were as guilty as the Dems. But that was under Clinton, he's the one that signed the bill to repeal it.

none of them 'worked'. if they had worked then there wouldn't have been a crash... and letting the tax cuts ride would have fixed whatever was residual.

what policies specifically worked?\

cutting taxes?

no.

cutting regulation?

no.

enacting legislation for the benefit of the religious right?

no.

i have no idea about the president's vote on the legislation. sorry.

clinton was wrong for compromising with the GOP about glass steagal and NAFTA.

 

[Wiseacre]

Coming out of 9/11 and a recession that hit in Bush's 1st year, his economic policies did result in a fairly nice bump in GDP and jobs for a stretch in there between 2003-2008. None of his policies had anything to do with the housing bubble or the credit crisis. None. We could use the same kind of bump right now if you ask me.