[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Democrats down to cheerleading 7.9 percent unemployment.
Cripes.[/quote]
LOL and your guy lost the election with that number…
If it just weren’t for that damn birth control.
Are you a poster that is considered relevant in this forum as well? Man, quite a collection of intellectuals gathering here.[/quote]
You in the Sustainability thread:
When you get the above wrong, you forfeit questioning the intelligence of ANY participant on this board.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
You seriously think people didn’t vote for Romney because he has money? [/quote]
yes.
I think the people who harbor this notion likely wouldn’t have voted for him if he was dirt poor, as it was the base, but his wealth was, without a doubt, an issue for people.
Sorry I didn’t save screen shots for you.
You are welcome to not believe me.
[quote]I mean, that is just so far out of touch with reality it barely merits rebuttal, and I wouldn’t have if it weren’t for the other bullshit that I think you get away with saying in this forum.
[/quote]
Well thank god you’re here then…
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:LOL You do realize we are talking about Medicare and Social Security here with the word “entitlement” right? Those are systems that are paid into by the recipients, so they are not receiving someone else’s property. If I am not mistaken, your benefits that are paid out are directly proprotional to the amount you paid in.[/quote]When you get the above wrong, you forfeit questioning the intelligence of ANY participant on this board.
[/quote]I just really have this feeling it won’t stop him though.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< He voted for Reagan and he hated what became of the republican party. >>>[/quote] Could I prevail upon you to further elucidate this point please?
[/quote]
He was a negotiator at heart. He could always bring people to find a common ground. This is what made him so good at his job. Ultimately, he saw that the republicans were/ are unwilling to concede anything in order to move forward.
The GOP has drawn a line in the sand and have refused to move an inch.
[/quote]With all due respect, negotiator is another word for convictionless compromiser. He didn’t do you any favors in what he taught you. The GOP has tragically moved 8000 miles in the last 50 years. They are further left than Kennedy’s Democrats. You’re living a myopic illusion of myopic youth which you will soon enough see for what it is. Long after it’s too late.
[/quote]
With all due respect, everything you post is colored by your faith.
You can believe what you like, but I have chosen to give your thoughts less weight than the musings of those not so shut off of the physical being.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Democrats down to cheerleading 7.9 percent unemployment.
Cripes.[/quote]
LOL and your guy lost the election with that number…
If it just weren’t for that damn birth control.
Are you a poster that is considered relevant in this forum as well? Man, quite a collection of intellectuals gathering here.[/quote]
You in the Sustainability thread:
When you get the above wrong, you forfeit questioning the intelligence of ANY participant on this board.
[/quote]
LOL You are really grasping at straws here now muchacho…
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
Well, my bubble is filled with hard working people who happened to make it. Some lean right, some lean left. But none of them hate on those who have money because they are all dining with good wines (really good) and plying golf on the best courses.[/quote]
I work with mostly rightys most moderate, couple hard right. I’m married to a progressive and my friends are a decent mix of extreme and moderate.
But yes, on social media, following the Obama grassroots, his wealth, tax status, off shore money, etc were a major issue for people.
Anyway, it is largely irrelevant. That isn’t what killed him in the end anyway.[/quote]
It is what killed him though. It is more than keeping the status quo, and that is all Romney had to offer.
People who have worked hard and made it from nothing understand that it can be taken away and are actually okay with it. They can empathize with those starting out. Romney had no empathy.
Granted, I come from a strong, hard working family unit, but I have wondered many times what my life would have been like had I not had the same family. I don’t think that Romney has ever ever evn given his good luck a second thought.[/quote]
I get what you’re saying, but there were some aspects of his plans that weren’t at all status quo. It is just the phrase “tax cuts” has become a dirty word if a republican post-bush says them. And I get that, I do. His deduction bucket was a great idea. It would have stripped power from special interest groups and made compromise in other places easier. The no tax on interest and cap gains for under 200k would have been wonderful for retired people.
As for the lack of empathy and not questioning the opportunity he had… He dropped the ball here. He doesn’t like to talk about that, the things he did for people, the how he has “paid it forward” his entire life. You don’t do that if you don’t care.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:LOL You do realize we are talking about Medicare and Social Security here with the word “entitlement” right? Those are systems that are paid into by the recipients, so they are not receiving someone else’s property. If I am not mistaken, your benefits that are paid out are directly proprotional to the amount you paid in.[/quote]When you get the above wrong, you forfeit questioning the intelligence of ANY participant on this board.
[/quote]I just really have this feeling it won’t stop him though.
[/quote]
Yeah if only I had a book of fairy tales with the above written in it, then you would accept it blindly…hey did you hear the earth is actually 11,000 years old and not 10,0000? I thought it was blasphemy too.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
huh? Then I am going to need a CPA explanation for what I am missing. I have been in the 28% income tax bracket for the entire time Obama has been president. I was at the lower end at the start, I am squarely in the middle now. What is it that I’m missing here?
Are you actually arguing that I paid more $ in taxes? Well yeah that might be true since my income increased (although it might not be because I went barely investing in my TSP to maxing it out at $17,500 so that might have offset), but are you arguing that my actual % paid has increased?[/quote]
Depending where you started, yes. I really don’t want to do the math at midnight, but if you saved more than net 0.5% in tax after a 25% pay raise I would be surprised. But yeah, I normally think in terms of higher AGI’s so, you might have actually saved about half a percent in tax from the FICA reduction.
Tax rates are marginal. Just because you are in a bracket doesn’t mean you pay that % of your taxable income in tax.
For example:
You make 100k.
The First 15k is taxed at 0%
The next 25k is taxed at 10%
The next 25k is taxed at 25%
The next 25k is taxed at 30%
so on and so forth.
the yields are right there. Like I said a fund like that is heavy in equities right now, if not all in equities. It is going to mirror the S&P.
[/quote]
LOL Beans man why do you keep bringing up the 5 year averages like it is relevant to my statement that my investments have done well under Obama? You do know Obama took office in January 2009, which was not 5 years ago, right? You are trying to perform a lot of mental gymnastics to disprove my statement that my investmsents have done well in the past 3.5 years.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
LOL Beans man why do you keep bringing up the 5 year averages like it is relevant to my statement that my investments have done well under Obama? You do know Obama took office in January 2009, which was not 5 years ago, right? You are trying to perform a lot of mental gymnastics to disprove my statement that my investmsents have done well in the past 3.5 years.
[/quote]
Because starting at the bottom of a crash and getting back to baseline does not value add.
If you want to ignore every outside factor other than the dollar spent starting in January of 2009, fine, you are right.
But, when you actually look at the big picture you see we likely haven’t made anything in terms of actual value. Particularly given it is in a 401k and can’t be touched for 30+ more years without a haircut.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Democrats down to cheerleading 7.9 percent unemployment.
Cripes.[/quote]
LOL and your guy lost the election with that number…
If it just weren’t for that damn birth control.
Are you a poster that is considered relevant in this forum as well? Man, quite a collection of intellectuals gathering here.[/quote]
You in the Sustainability thread:
When you get the above wrong, you forfeit questioning the intelligence of ANY participant on this board.
[/quote]
Damn, I missed that one, lol.
maybe tomorrow. i dont’ have the energy to type out the math.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:
Well, my bubble is filled with hard working people who happened to make it. Some lean right, some lean left. But none of them hate on those who have money because they are all dining with good wines (really good) and plying golf on the best courses.[/quote]
I work with mostly rightys most moderate, couple hard right. I’m married to a progressive and my friends are a decent mix of extreme and moderate.
But yes, on social media, following the Obama grassroots, his wealth, tax status, off shore money, etc were a major issue for people.
Anyway, it is largely irrelevant. That isn’t what killed him in the end anyway.[/quote]
It is what killed him though. It is more than keeping the status quo, and that is all Romney had to offer.
People who have worked hard and made it from nothing understand that it can be taken away and are actually okay with it. They can empathize with those starting out. Romney had no empathy.
Granted, I come from a strong, hard working family unit, but I have wondered many times what my life would have been like had I not had the same family. I don’t think that Romney has ever ever evn given his good luck a second thought.[/quote]
I get what you’re saying, but there were some aspects of his plans that weren’t at all status quo. It is just the phrase “tax cuts” has become a dirty word if a republican post-bush says them. And I get that, I do. His deduction bucket was a great idea. It would have stripped power from special interest groups and made compromise in other places easier. The no tax on interest and cap gains for under 200k would have been wonderful for retired people.
As for the lack of empathy and not questioning the opportunity he had… He dropped the ball here. He doesn’t like to talk about that, the things he did for people, the how he has “paid it forward” his entire life. You don’t do that if you don’t care.
[/quote]
He didnt get any of his plans out there. There was no evidence that he paid anything forward.
He acted as if he was owed this job because he campaigned for it for seven years. He never connected. He wasn’t liked in the primaries (and I paid attention, even watched many of the debates). He was simply the best that the GOP had to offer at the time (other than Huntsman who faded early).
Many on this board think that Obama is arrogant. Romney didn’t even have a concession speech ready. He had fireworks on hand to celebrate. He never even considered that he might lose because he surrounded himself with sycophants who told him what he wanted to hear. This is arrogance.
[quote]Christine wrote:
He didnt get any of his plans out there.[/quote]
They were on his website, and spoken about in all three debates. Mostly as attacks from Obama, but they certainly were.
As in you didn’t hear about it, or you think the small bit that media, ryan and himself covered were lies?
don’t get me wrong here. I was never bullish on Romney. (Ask ZEB, lol) And I can understand where you are coming from here, even though I didn’t see that.
[quote]Many on this board think that Obama is arrogant. Romney didn’t even have a concession speech ready. He had fireworks on hand to celebrate. He never even considered that he might lose because he surrounded himself with sycophants who told him what he wanted to hear. This is arrogance.
[/quote]
That to me sounds like he trusted his ground game wasn’t going to be horrid, and that the anti-obama sentiment was going to motivate voters.
But you can’t deny obama isn’t guilty of sycophants and a strong cult like following.
*having sycophants around
[quote]Christine wrote:
He didnt get any of his plans out there.
[/quote]
Uh, Obama didn’t even release a 2nd term agenda until after the third debate. Even then it was an 18 page pamphlet. Pages mostly filled with glossy photos. Nothing about entitlement reform.
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< With all due respect, everything you post is colored by your faith. >>.[/quote]Indeed it is. as is yours, but that’s the other 25 threads. [quote]Christine wrote:<<< You can believe what you like, but I have chosen to give your thoughts less weight than the musings of those not so shut off of the physical being.[/quote] Well I understand, but I am anything but shut off to the physical being. I mean that. I also mean it when I say that I tried to be thoughtful when disagreeing with your father. I apologize if I wasn’t as successful as I’d hoped. Looking at the post now. Little girls love their Daddies (the few that are left), as well they should and I wouldn’t want to be insensitive to that with you. My Mind and keyboard are quicker sometimes than my heart. I’m sorry.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
*having sycophants around[/quote]
Well, he had many more of them then.
All the lib sites I was reading were discussing how many more offices and volunteers they had in their distrcts. They were talking about driving folks to the polling places. The conservative sites mentioned nothing about this.
This thread is about why Obama won and the ground game is it. They had volunteers on the ground willing to work for it.
If you want your guy to win in four years, get out and drive voters to the polls. Volunteer.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< With all due respect, everything you post is colored by your faith. >>.[/quote]Indeed it is. as is yours, but that’s the other 25 threads. [quote]Christine wrote:<<< You can believe what you like, but I have chosen to give your thoughts less weight than the musings of those not so shut off of the physical being.[/quote] Well I understand, but I am anything but shut off to the physical being. I mean that. I also mean it when I say that I tried to be thoughtful when disagreeing with your father. I apologize if I wasn’t as successful as I’d hoped. Looking at the post now. Little girls love their Daddies (the few that are left), as well they should and I wouldn’t want to be insensitive to that with you. My Mind and keyboard are quicker sometimes than my heart. I’m sorry.
[/quote]
.
Nothing to apologize for.
It is exactly the reply I would expect from you.
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< It is exactly the reply I would expect from you. [/quote]Can I ask you for a short explanation of what you mean by this?
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< It is exactly the reply I would expect from you. [/quote]Can I ask you for a short explanation of what you mean by this?
[/quote]
She means that you are an arrogant cunt who types smileys and feel good words around lowlife passive aggressive attacks that would make a high school teenager blush.
[quote]VTBalla34 wrote:
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
[quote]Christine wrote:<<< It is exactly the reply I would expect from you. [/quote]Can I ask you for a short explanation of what you mean by this?
[/quote]She means that you are an arrogant cunt who types smileys and feel good words around lowlife passive aggressive attacks that would make a high school teenager blush.[/quote]Well then that’s what she’ll say.