Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

[Lakhota]

Bill Kristol: Obama Has Turned Around The Financial Meltdown 'Pretty Well' | ThinkProgress

Bill Kristol on the economy - YouTube

 

[Murf76]

Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

.By Chris Moody, Yahoo! News 9/19/2012

In the twilight of President Barack Obama's first term, many polls, including a new Quinnipiac University tri-state survey of likely voters, show that most Americans say they are not better off than they were four years ago. But in those same polls, the president retains his edge over challenger Mitt Romney.

That's not normal, says Quinnipiac University pollster Peter A. Brown.

"Most times if voters think things haven't gone well, they say, 'Let's think of somebody else.' But at this point they're not saying that," Brown said. "Clearly they think [Obama] is more in tune with their lives."

Voters say they

Why? Because the US is controlled by the Feds. They control the media and election machine. They select the politicians to control the government. That's why even Clinton did a good job in his last term, Bush won the election. What the Feds needed was not a good economy, they need war and the Patriot Act. Several month after his election, 911 happened which satisfied what the Feds needed.

This time, Obama will give the Feds something Romney can't give. So you saw Romney is under the fire of media despite the life of Americans is worse off after four years reign of Obama.

It's alot less "tinfoil hat" than that. It's about IGNORANCE.

Now, some of that ignorance is caused by our media, made up of ideological eggheads who all went to the same liberal egghead schools. They live in a very insular egghead world and mostly only know other eggheads like themselves. They're pretty much useful idiots who believe they're doing the right thing, because once upon a time, their egghead professors told them so.

But the rest of the problem is WILLFUL IGNORANCE. I'm talking about people who have NO CLUE what's going on in the world. Frankly, I don't know what could possibly be so pressing as to not know who the Vice Presidential candidates are, or that Mitt Romney isn't actually black.... but it is what it is.

[youtube]SeJbOU4nmHQ[/youtube]

Occam's razor, man. The simplest explanation is that there are just alot more dumb people than you think there are.

 

[Oddball]

My penis belongs to me, not the gubmint, comrade.

Your avatar reminds me of Deliverance.

Your posts remind me that rderp and truthdontmatter have serious competition.

 

[Lakhota]

My penis belongs to me, not the gubmint, comrade.

Your avatar reminds me of Deliverance.

Your posts remind me that rderp and truthdontmatter have serious competition.

rdean and truthmatters are great American patriots.

 

[Oddball]

rderp and truthdontmatter are great American cement heads....No surprise you throw in with them.

 

[Lakhota]

Deb Fischer, Nebraska GOP Senate Candidate, Breaks With Mitt Romney's '47 Percent' Remarks

 

[Lakhota]

Paul Ryan On Conservative Criticism Of Mitt Romney: It's In Their Nature To Complain

 

[Qantrill]

Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

See link....

UnSkewed Polls -- erasing the bias to show an accurate picture of politics

 

[Lakhota]

OMG, just imagine this clown having access to the nuclear suitcase - with his lead foreign policy advisor John "Nuke Iran" Bolton beside him. Holy shit...

Mitt Romney Wonders Why Ann Romney's Airplane Windows Don't Roll Down

 

[rdean]

After the way Republicans left the economy, voters know they are better off now.

 

[Lakhota]

ON January 3, 2007 Democrats took control of BOTH the U.S. House of Representatives AND the U.S. Senate at the start of the 110th Congress, CONTROLLING both houses of Congress for the first time since 1995.

Yeah, for 133 days...

 

[Qantrill]

ON January 3, 2007 Democrats took control of BOTH the U.S. House of Representatives AND the U.S. Senate at the start of the 110th Congress, CONTROLLING both houses of Congress for the first time since 1995.

Yeah, for 133 days...

'Fraid not genius. If you subtract January 3, 2007 from January 3, 2011 (the date the Republicans regained the House of Representatives) in the 112th Congress to convene, you get 1,460 days. Your financial wizard DEMOCRATS were controlling ALL THINGS FINANCIAL in the House, the Senate and the Presidency for four LOOOOONG damn years.

About like you did when you came up with 133 days. GEESUS...

 

[EriktheRed]

Voters say they’re worse off after four years of Obama, so why is Romney struggling?

Because he's a slimy Vitalis soaked dick, who should be selling shoes.

I'd sooner vote for Eddie Haskell.

You're in luck, then. He's already running for Veep.

 

[Care4all]

ON January 3, 2007 Democrats took control of BOTH the U.S. House of Representatives AND the U.S. Senate at the start of the 110th Congress, CONTROLLING both houses of Congress for the first time since 1995.

Yeah, for 133 days...

'Fraid not genius. If you subtract January 3, 2007 from January 3, 2011 (the date the Republicans regained the House of Representatives) in the 112th Congress to convene, you get 1,460 days. Your financial wizard DEMOCRATS were controlling ALL THINGS FINANCIAL in the House, the Senate and the Presidency for four LOOOOONG damn years.

About like you did when you came up with 133 days. GEESUS...

with the filibuster in the Senate, you can't control the Senate without 60 Senators. a super majority.

 

[Qantrill]

Yeah, for 133 days...

'Fraid not genius. If you subtract January 3, 2007 from January 3, 2011 (the date the Republicans regained the House of Representatives) in the 112th Congress to convene, you get 1,460 days. Your financial wizard DEMOCRATS were controlling ALL THINGS FINANCIAL in the House, the Senate and the Presidency for four LOOOOONG damn years.

About like you did when you came up with 133 days. GEESUS...

with the filibuster in the Senate, you can't control the Senate without 60 Senators. a super majority.

The filibuster wasn't an issue until the Chappaquiddick kid finally bit the big one. By that time Obamacareless was drawn up in the back room behind locked doors by ten democrats. And any cooperation between the two parties had disappeared in the name of lack of respect and cooperation.

 

[katsung47]

Who are these "Feds" that you're talking about?

Feds = D.O.D. (Pentagon) and D.O.J. (FBI , DEA)

QE3 released in September is apparently a tactic to favor Obama’s campaign. The real estate business will booming. Riches will have their assets price increased. What poor people get will be high price for gas and food and house. The inflation is at sight.

Marc Faber: Fed's QE forever is ludicrous; no country has become rich from consumption



Source: BI-ME , Author: Constantine Gardner

Posted: Fri September 14, 2012

What are the consequences of QE forever?

"Asset prices will go up and the money will flow to the Mayfair Economy," he said, defining the latter as an "economy of the rich people whose assets prices go up and whose net worth increases" without any trickle down benefit to the real economy.

What you have is a small economy that is booming and the majority of the economy is being damaged by QE, Faber explains.


Who got us there?

Faber sees the Fed's monetary policies over the last 15 years as mainly responsible for the various asset bubbles (Nasdaq, real estate etc...) leading to the subprime crisis in 2007. "The money printers and the neo-Keynesians interventionists are responsible for the crisis, reckons Faber, and people should know this."

Conclusion?

Dr Bernanke's attempt to boost growth and reduce unemployment will end up, according to Dr. Faber, in a fiscal Grand Canyon with never ending deficits, the majority of the economy being damaged, the man in the street facing higher prices and losing his job.

Marc Faber: Fed's QE forever is ludicrous; no country has become rich from consumption - Business Intelligence Middle East - bi-me.com - News, analysis, reports

 

[KissMy]

ON January 3, 2007 Democrats took control of BOTH the U.S. House of Representatives AND the U.S. Senate at the start of the 110th Congress, CONTROLLING both houses of Congress for the first time since 1995.

Yeah, for 133 days...

Yeah - Look at the mess Democrats made ON January 3, 2007 Democrats took control of BOTH the U.S. House of Representatives AND the U.S. Senate at the start of the 110th Congress, CONTROLLING both houses of Congress for the first time since 1995.

 

[katsung47]

The real reason is the Feds need Obama's new Health care reform. There is nothing they care if people can benefit from it or not. They just want it to frame a target in their case with which they have created OKC bombing, 911 attack to get the Patriot Act.

You can see it from the surprise turn around of the Chief Justice Roberts.

726. The surprise turnaround of Chief Justice (7/4/2012)

On 6/28, Supreme Court issued a pass for Obama's Health care policy. What surprised people was Chief Justice Roberts sided with four liberal justices in voting 5-4 to declare the law's "individual mandate" constitutional.


Why did John Roberts, a Bush appointee who generally votes with his conservative colleagues, suddenly change his opinion to vote with the liberal? Just three months ago, he still opposed that "individual mandate" law.

Chief Justice Roberts: Can government require you to buy a cell phone?

Mar. 27, 2012 - Chief Justice Roberts asks the Solicitor General Verrilli if the government can require the purchase of cell phones for emergency services, just as the health-care law requires for health insurance.(The Washington Post)

Chief Justice Roberts: Can government require you to buy a cell phone? (0:42) - The Washington Post

There are different theories about this mysterious turnaround. Mostly were from disinformation office of the Feds to cover up their puppet Roberts. None could solve the puzzle. I know why - the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision. When the Feds want to put Kat Sung under surveillance, they forced the law makers passing through the Patriot Act. (Through OKC bombing and 911 bombing) When the Feds want to restrict Kat Sung in US, they activate the TSA search, (blocking leaving from air flight) blocking the entering of Canada and Mexico; (by "Operation Fast and Furious") see "697. TSA search, Canada and Mexico (12/11/2011)". Now when they want Kat Sung to have a health insurance, they activate their proxy- John Roberts.

Six years ago when Roberts was selected as Chief Justice, I have written already,
"344. Roberts, a secret agent of D.O.J. (9/18/05)"
The dark side of the USA in Public Forum Forum
This case proves I was very, very accurate at that judgement.

I'll talk about why the Feds want that "individual mandate" provision.

 

[katsung47]

742. Help Obama to win the second term (10/24/2012)

The recent Gallup poll shows that Mitt Romney leads over President Barack Obama in president Campaign. That’s just a gimmick to cheat people. The election result is pre-decided. Obama will stay for his second term. It doesn’t relate to any politics. It is for a case of the Feds. They need Obama’s Health Reform that they forced Chief Justice Roberts to change his mind in June to pass the “Health Reform”. (see “ 726. The surprise turnaround of Chief Justice (7/4/2012)”)

To keep Obama to stay in his seat, they have to create an economic background that favors him. Two months before voting date, in early September, we saw European bank chief Draghi said the bank would buy the bond with no limit. How could this affect US president election?

Draghi helps out Obama campaign

By Robin Harding in Washington September 6, 2012


Barack Obama’s chances of re-election as US president rose on Thursday and the words that did it were not his but Mario Draghi’s.

Long before Mr Obama stood up to accept the Democratic nomination in Charlotte, North Carolina, the head of the European Central Bank had sketched out a new plan to buy the bonds of troubled eurozone countries.


That will not move the polls; it will not move a single vote. But Mr Draghi has lowered the gravest of risks to Mr Obama: a pre-election meltdown in the eurozone that would have blown up banks, pulverised Wall Street, and routed a fragile US economy back into recession.

If that happened, it would not be Mr Obama’s fault, but he would get the blame. Just as the failure of Lehman Brothers doomed his rival John McCain in 2008, a eurozone implosion would create economic odds too great for Mr Obama to surmount.

Draghi helps out Obama campaign - FT.com

Within days, Federal Reserve Chief Bernanke pushed out another QE which would push up economy temporarily but hurt it in long term with inflation. The Republicans felt it immediately. The timing of issuing QE3 is not a coincidence. It helps Obama.

Fed risks political fallout from QE3

By Robin Harding and James Politi in Washington September 14, 2012

Mitt Romney, the Republican candidate, duly opened fire on Friday after the Fed began an open-ended third round of quantitative easing (QE3), under which it will buy $40bn of mortgage-backed securities a month.

Fed risks political fallout from QE3 - FT.com

QE3 will create another housing bubble.

Marc Faber: Fed's QE forever is ludicrous; no country has become rich from consumption

Source: BI-ME , Author: Constantine Gardner Fri September 14, 2012

"Asset prices will go up and the money will flow to the Mayfair Economy," he said, defining the latter as an "economy of the rich people whose assets prices go up and whose net worth increases" without any trickle down benefit to the real economy.

What you have is a small economy that is booming and the majority of the economy is being damaged by QE, Faber explains.

Faber sees the Fed's monetary policies over the last 15 years as mainly responsible for the various asset bubbles (Nasdaq, real estate etc...) leading to the subprime crisis in 2007. "The money printers and the neo-Keynesians interventionists are responsible for the crisis, reckons Faber, and people should know this."

Dr Bernanke's attempt to boost growth and reduce unemployment will end up, according to Dr. Faber, in a fiscal Grand Canyon with never ending deficits, the majority of the economy being damaged, the man in the street facing higher prices and losing his job.

Marc Faber: Fed's QE forever is ludicrous; no country has become rich from consumption - Business Intelligence Middle East - bi-me.com - News, analysis, reports

Faber sees the Fed's monetary policies over the last 15 years as mainly responsible for the various asset bubbles (Nasdaq, real estate etc...), the Nasdaq bubble is the dot.com bubble, I talked about these two bubbles from #733 to #739. And the Federal Reserve now continues to create the third one. At the purpose to help the Feds to remove the hot potatoes in their hands to the ordinary people.

743. Create a hoax of a better off economy (10/29/2012)

Three months before the voting date, the unemployment rate was still high that it made the re-election unlikely for Obama.

What Does an 8.3 Percent Unemployment Rate Mean for the Election?

By: Jon King | August 5, 2012

Many pundits (including this one) have made the point that if the unemployment rate is at 8% or higher that the president will have an uphill battle to win the election.

The reason why 8% is such a hurdle is that no modern president has ever won re-election when unemployment was over 8%. Actually, if one wants to take an even more skeptical view, they could say that no president since Roosevelt has won re-election with unemployment over 7.2%.

What Does an 8.3 Percent Unemployment Rate Mean for the Election?

It’s hard to convince people the unemployment rate would drop below 7.2% in two months from 8.3%. But they still could manage to get a figure of 7.8% in order to make Obama’s re-election more reasonable.

Fact Check: Labor Secretary Solis Misleads on Jobs Revisions

by Joel B. Pollak 5 Oct 2012

Suspicion about the federal government's September jobs report has fallen on Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis, who appeared on CNBC this morning and defended the numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), claiming--falsely--that upward revisions of 86,000 jobs were from the private sector. In fact, the new number is entirely accounted for by upwards revisions to state and federal government payrolls.

The BLS reported that while only 114,000 jobs were created in September--which would have translated into a rise in unemployment from 8.1% to 8.2%--the unemployment rate fell dramatically to 7.8%. That unusual drop is the fastest in nearly three decades, and was unexpected even in the rosiest predictions.

One reason for the rise was an upward revision of 86,000 to the July and August jobs numbers--all of which came from a 91,000 increase in the estimate of public sector jobs. Private sector job estimates were actually revised downward by 5,000.

In addition, the BLS reported a large rise in the number of part-time jobs, adding 600,000 jobs to the total--a dramatic increase of 7.5%, not explained by any other economic indicators--and raising questions about whether the government had changed the way it counted part-time workers.

Fact Check: Labor Secretary Solis Misleads on Jobs Revisions

Nobody can verify the figure. It’s all under their control. They could cover up the truth of 911 attack. They could make Bin Laden died twice. So what to maintain a puppet president? If they could have kept a war criminal (who activated a war with a lie) to stay on his second term, what’s the problem for another puppet? All they have to do is to create a hoax of a better off economy for several months then blame everything on the coming financial cliff.

 

[katsung47]

744. Manipulation in Mother Nature’s guise (11/7/2012)

The Feds like to play the God’s role to control people. In 2004, when they planned to keep a proved liar on chair for his second term, they said it was the “God’s will”.
Pat Robertson predicted "I think George Bush is going to win in a walk, I really believe I'm hearing from the Lord it's going to be like a blowout election in 2004. It's shaping up that way."
Eight years later, the Feds want to shape up the way for Obama. They play the God’s will in another way – in Mother Nature’s guise.

If you still remember how storm Issac had disturbed the GOP Convention and suppressed Republican’s spirit.

GOP fears ghost of Katrina at RNC 2012
Republican convention 2012: GOP fears ghost of Katrina - POLITICO.com

It was so coincident that Limbaugh alleged:

Rush Limbaugh Says Obama Manipulated Isaac Storm Track To Delay GOP Convention: ‘The Hurricane Center Is … Obama’
By Stephen Lacey on Aug 27, 2012
Rush Limbaugh Says Obama Manipulated Isaac Storm Track To Delay GOP Convention: 'The Hurricane Center Is ... Obama' | ThinkProgress

Then another coincidence came:

Conspiracy Theorists Say Obama Engineered Hurricane Sandy
By Elizabeth Flock October 29, 2012

As Hurricane Sandy blasts the eastern seaboard just over a week before Election Day, a number of conspiracy theorists have decided President Barack Obama engineered the mega-storm to secure his re-election.

InfoWars.com, TheIntelHub.com, and ConsfearacyNewz all posted stories over the last several days alleging that the The High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program, or HAARP, helped the president engineer Sandy.

Conspiracy Theorists Say Obama Engineered Hurricane Sandy - Washington Whispers (usnews.com)

Tuesday, Oct 30, 2012 05:28 AM PDT
So what does Romney do now?

If the hurricane freezes the presidential race in place, it's not good news for the GOP nominee
By Steve Kornacki

For Romney, the downside is obvious: Sandy has for now frozen the race in place – and where the race is right now isn’t good for him. If the election were held this moment, Barack Obama would probably be returned to office for a second term. The president is at best tied with Romney in the national horserace and at worst behind by a point, but he holds clear advantages in the most important battleground states and is much better-positioned to reach 270 electoral votes.

Romney needs to shore up states like Virginia and Colorado and erase stubborn gaps in Ohio or Wisconsin and Iowa before next Tuesday. Momentum alone doesn’t seem like it will get him there. He surged in the wake of the first debate in Denver, but the race has settled into place since then. For lack of a better term, Romney is in need of some kind of jolt that would fix his swing state problem.

Sandy severely complicates this task. For one thing, it has overtaken the presidential campaign as the top national story and will continue to do so for several days. Obama, as the president, has an obvious place in this story. The actions of the White House and the response of the federal government are integral to the clean-up, and Obama has a platform to showcase his presidential leadership. Romney, though, has no official role, and really can’t force his way into the story. There’s also the matter of unseemliness – it wouldn’t look too good for Romney to keep right on campaigning as the rest of the country takes stock of a natural disaster. Thus did Romney cancel events yesterday and again today.

So what does Romney do now? - Salon.com