Why Obama Won

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
361

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

My thoughts exactly - the next two years being like the last two. Then a strong possibility, if historical trends hold, for an increase in House Repubs + takeover of Senate.[/quote]

Push ,

I am not shitting you, but people are really fucking scared here. Not just that Bam won, but we passed more taxes locally here, along with a 2/3 Democratic supermajority too. Many businesses are planning to leave here, rich are gone, now the middle class are leaving.

Highest sales tax and income tax rates in the nation, more than Hawaii.

Keep eyes on here if you want to see the first state to collapse, the City of Los Angeles to file bankruptcy before 2014, over half a Trillion in debt (about $618 Billion for the whole state).[/quote]

California looks consistent with Texas re: debt per capita and as a percentage of GDP.

[/quote]

Doesn’t Texas have a 26 billion dollar rainy day fun and no individual income tax though?

[/quote]

I lived in Texas for 15 years. No income tax, average sales tax, but brutal property tax. I sure would hate a state income tax on top of it.

362

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

However, for those of us who despise him
[/quote]

LOL. Why do I get the feeling that this made up the majority of the votes against alone?[/quote]For the record I do not hate the president. Or any other person. I pray FOR him, his family and our nation. And even you on occasion Doc.

363

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]jjackkrash wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

My thoughts exactly - the next two years being like the last two. Then a strong possibility, if historical trends hold, for an increase in House Repubs + takeover of Senate.[/quote]

Push ,

I am not shitting you, but people are really fucking scared here. Not just that Bam won, but we passed more taxes locally here, along with a 2/3 Democratic supermajority too. Many businesses are planning to leave here, rich are gone, now the middle class are leaving.

Highest sales tax and income tax rates in the nation, more than Hawaii.

Keep eyes on here if you want to see the first state to collapse, the City of Los Angeles to file bankruptcy before 2014, over half a Trillion in debt (about $618 Billion for the whole state).[/quote]

California looks consistent with Texas re: debt per capita and as a percentage of GDP.

[/quote]

Doesn’t Texas have a 26 billion dollar rainy day fun and no individual income tax though?

[/quote]

I lived in Texas for 15 years. No income tax, average sales tax, but brutal property tax. I sure would hate a state income tax on top of it.

[/quote]

Property tax is local. But that is typical of a no income tax state. I can’t verify it without looking at RE tax bills, but I would have to guess it works out in the favor of the resident of the no income tax state.

I don’t know how much of either state’s debt is bonds v govn’t spending borrowing. But their is a difference between the two. Yes both debt, but one is worse than the other.

364

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]BCFlynn wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

However, for those of us who despise him
[/quote]

LOL. Why do I get the feeling that this made up the majority of the votes against alone?[/quote]

Because it is the same reason most of the votes against bush in 2004 went to Kerry, who is basically Mitt lite, and yet no one on the left had a problem attacking romney for his money. [/quote]

I would whole heartedly disagree with calling Kerry Mitt-Lite. Romney, though born in privledge, earned his money. Kerry married his. Mitt has run for President the last 6 years, Kerry had been running since Yale. As one of his constituents, I can’t think of one piece of legislation with his name on it. He did go to Vietnam. I’ll give him a ton of credit for that. I don’t care whether his purple hearts are in question or not, the guy was there.
[/quote]

I’m in MA as well.

I agree with everything you said, lol.

I was just making a point that the left hated Romney’s money, when they ran money against Bush in 2004. OH and they still hate Bush, so acting like it is some major source of controversy or news that people hate Obama is silly.

[/quote]

See Beans, this is where I think you are in the bubble. Nobody that I personally know (and I know a LOT of democrats) were bitching that Romney has money. I am in DC and me and most of my friends are pretty well off, and largely lean Democrat, and not once has anybody said that Romney being rich is a bad thing. Romney did not lose this election because he is rich, he lost because he is a rich dude THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE AMERICA. His speeches made me squirm when he tried to appeal to middle america (biscuits and gravy, trees the right height, etc.). And the fact that the tea party pushed him so hard to the right in the primaries, only to require him to sprint to the middle during the election in order to capture the independent vote, made people understandably question where he actually stood on the issues.

365

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

I have to disagree with you and X on this. How can you just abandon your principles?
[/quote]

Wrong question. How can you hold principals that differ so much from the majority of the country yet still think everyone else is wrong?[/quote]Because those are the ones the country was founded on and what made it what it was? In this nation in 2012, the more people believe something the more likely it is to be wrong.
[/quote]

LOL. When this country was founded, cocaine was legal and likely in the pockets of most in the room during the signing of the Constitution. I don’t think they had anything against swisher sweets either.

Oh, and:

The age of consent was 12.

This country has decided to take away the very freedoms that those men fought for by coming here. Get a clue please.[/quote]Why would you send me to a wiki page about England?

366

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Didn’t Kerry park his yacht in another state to avoid paying taxes on it ? I recall a story like that.[/quote]

Yeah, he put it to port in Rhode Island I believe. He avoided paying taxes on it that way. But that’s no big deal the media didn’t mind a bit he is a democrat after all.[/quote]

Yeah ZEB, thats it, its all because the liberal media ignored it.

It has nothing to do with the fact that since the boat is in another state, it is not immediately accessible to him. its not like he could just waltz down to Rhode Island to take his yacht out any time he wants.

I’m pretty sure this roadblock doesn’t exist when you stash your money in an offshore account.

But yeah, the two situations are completely the same. Way to pick up on that.

367

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

LOL…I really wonder how many people here are actually out of work and down on their luck?

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes, and my investments have averaged about 11% per year. For the life of me I don’t see enough people out of work with no options for employment to justify this type of chicken little bullshit.

368

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

LOL…I really wonder how many people here are actually out of work and down on their luck?

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes, and my investments have averaged about 11% per year. For the life of me I don’t see enough people out of work with no options for employment to justify this type of chicken little bullshit.[/quote]

Then you might want to look at the unemployment number.

370

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

LOL…I really wonder how many people here are actually out of work and down on their luck?

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes, and my investments have averaged about 11% per year. For the life of me I don’t see enough people out of work with no options for employment to justify this type of chicken little bullshit.[/quote]

Then you might want to look at the unemployment number.[/quote]

Is that the number that is dropping coupled with 32 straight months of job growth? Got ya.

Sorry to hear that you are down on your luck though.

373

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes,[/quote]

This didn’t happen. Unless you are leaving out major details like buying a house or having kids, this situation didn’t happen. No.

Neither did this.

Markets just recently got back to 2008 levels. So, you broken even.

And you are giving me shit about a “bubble”… lol

374

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

See Beans, this is where I think you are in the bubble. Nobody that I personally know (and I know a LOT of democrats) were bitching that Romney has money. I am in DC and me and most of my friends are pretty well off, and largely lean Democrat, and not once has anybody said that Romney being rich is a bad thing. Romney did not lose this election because he is rich, he lost because he is a rich dude THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE AMERICA. His speeches made me squirm when he tried to appeal to middle america (biscuits and gravy, trees the right height, etc.). And the fact that the tea party pushed him so hard to the right in the primaries, only to require him to sprint to the middle during the election in order to capture the independent vote, made people understandably question where he actually stood on the issues.
[/quote]

Not only do you sound like a TV commercial but you are wrong. He lost because turn out was down. Had he gotten the same turnout McCain got, he would be president elect romney.

Turnout can be explained by obama’s impeccable ground game, and ultra negative campaign, which have long been said to suppress turnout.

Third, please think about the fact you tried to discredit my point by saying I was in a bubble, because your bubble didn’t agree. I spent a lot of time on social media this cycle following the grassroots, and yes, him being rich was an issue. You bring it up in the very next post in fact.

375

LOL oh beans, this is really getting silly…but here are some numbers, I hope you choose not to ignore them…

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes,[/quote]

This didn’t happen. Unless you are leaving out major details like buying a house or having kids, this situation didn’t happen. No.[/quote]

Nope, didnt knock up my bitch and didnt invest in a house. I am living the exact same renter lifestyle that I was in 2008. Income tax has not increased right? Obama’s 2% decrease in the social security tax (Payroll Tax Credit?) knocked off my tax bill. Where else would my increases have come from? It is quite possible I am missing it.

[quote]Countinbeans wrote:

Neither did this.

Markets just recently got back to 2008 levels. So, you broken even. [/quote]

You are right, my mistake…

It was actually 12%

https://www.tsp.gov/investmentfunds/lfundsheet/fundPerformance_L2040.shtml

Why in the fuck do you assume I invested in some “overall market” fund? That is just a ridiculous assumption.

I eagerly wait your well-reasoned rebuttal. Especially for the investment return portion. LOL

376

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

LOL…I really wonder how many people here are actually out of work and down on their luck?

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes, and my investments have averaged about 11% per year. For the life of me I don’t see enough people out of work with no options for employment to justify this type of chicken little bullshit.[/quote]

Then you might want to look at the unemployment number.[/quote]

Is that the number that is dropping coupled with 32 straight months of job growth? Got ya.

Sorry to hear that you are down on your luck though.[/quote]

Actually, it ticked back up to 7.9.

377

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]BCFlynn wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

However, for those of us who despise him
[/quote]

LOL. Why do I get the feeling that this made up the majority of the votes against alone?[/quote]

Because it is the same reason most of the votes against bush in 2004 went to Kerry, who is basically Mitt lite, and yet no one on the left had a problem attacking romney for his money. [/quote]

I would whole heartedly disagree with calling Kerry Mitt-Lite. Romney, though born in privledge, earned his money. Kerry married his. Mitt has run for President the last 6 years, Kerry had been running since Yale. As one of his constituents, I can’t think of one piece of legislation with his name on it. He did go to Vietnam. I’ll give him a ton of credit for that. I don’t care whether his purple hearts are in question or not, the guy was there.
[/quote]

I’m in MA as well.

I agree with everything you said, lol.

I was just making a point that the left hated Romney’s money, when they ran money against Bush in 2004. OH and they still hate Bush, so acting like it is some major source of controversy or news that people hate Obama is silly.

[/quote]

See Beans, this is where I think you are in the bubble. Nobody that I personally know (and I know a LOT of democrats) were bitching that Romney has money. I am in DC and me and most of my friends are pretty well off, and largely lean Democrat, and not once has anybody said that Romney being rich is a bad thing. Romney did not lose this election because he is rich, he lost because he is a rich dude THAT IS COMPLETELY OUT OF TOUCH WITH MIDDLE AMERICA. His speeches made me squirm when he tried to appeal to middle america (biscuits and gravy, trees the right height, etc.). And the fact that the tea party pushed him so hard to the right in the primaries, only to require him to sprint to the middle during the election in order to capture the independent vote, made people understandably question where he actually stood on the issues.
[/quote]

Tis true.

My father, who was lucky enough to fall into a golden parachute, lamented that the republicans gave him no choice but to vote along party lines. He was a fantastic negotiator and did very well. He retired several times but was always brought back because he was good at what he did, when I was young, I remember him telling me never to vote along party lines but to choose each person for what they stood for. He was the person that every liked, it didn’t matter who you were or where you came from. He was the hardest worker I have ever known. Didn’t take a dime from his parents. He sold newspapers on the corners and worked for everything that he ever got. He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party.

Mostly, he hated that the republican party gave him no choice than to vote democrat.

I know this is only ancedoteal, but there are a lot of us out here who work and pay taxes and are turned off by the GOP.

378

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

[quote]MaximusB wrote:
Does anyone else get the feeling that, not much of anything will change ?

I mean, ok Bam won, but he has shown he can’t get the job done.

The mood here seems one of having watched a game that ended in a tie, with no overtime or sudden death allowed.

No sense of finality. [/quote]

LOL…I really wonder how many people here are actually out of work and down on their luck?

My salary increased about 25% under Obama, I have paid less % in taxes, and my investments have averaged about 11% per year. For the life of me I don’t see enough people out of work with no options for employment to justify this type of chicken little bullshit.[/quote]

Then you might want to look at the unemployment number.[/quote]

Is that the number that is dropping coupled with 32 straight months of job growth? Got ya.

Sorry to hear that you are down on your luck though.[/quote]

Actually, it ticked back up to 7.9.
[/quote]

LOL because more people rejoined the workforce. Why are ya’ll so adamant about using people that exit the workforce when the unemployment rate is falling, but completely fucking ignore it when the rate rises?

379

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

Is that the number that is dropping…[/quote]

380

[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:

Nope, didnt knock up my bitch and didnt invest in a house. I am living the exact same renter lifestyle that I was in 2008. Income tax has not increased right? Obama’s 2% decrease in the social security tax (Payroll Tax Credit?) knocked off my tax bill. Where else would my increases have come from? It is quite possible I am missing it. [/quote]

A 25% increase in pay is going to increase your marginal tax rate enough to zero out the FICA reduction if not be greater than the 2% reduction.

Well to be fair if you were making less than 50k-ish to begin with, then yeah your total percentage would have net dropped.

So it depends on where you increased 25% from really.

[quote]
I eagerly wait your well-reasoned rebuttal. Especially for the investment return portion. LOL[/quote]

The link you just posted has a 5 year yield of 0.75%… Like I said, you just broke even.