Presidential Debate #1 Thread

[David88vert]

Who do you think won?
Comments and fact checks welcome.

Personally, I think that Romney controlled it better.

[BanginJimmy]

Romney won in a landslide but at the same time did no lasting damage to Obama.

Short term bump for Romney, long term, nothing more than a couple lines for an attack ad.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Sinfix_15]

Romney won easily.

[Sinfix_15]

Romney won in a landslide but at the same time did no lasting damage to Obama.

Short term bump for Romney, long term, nothing more than a couple lines for an attack ad.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

real question, how would someone ever do lasting damage to Obama? he has a legion of blind followers who have unconditional and unwavering affection for him.

[David88vert]

I think Romney had no choice but to come out strong. If he lost here it was pretty much over.

Romney spoke to Obama and appeared to listen and make notes to respond. He seemed prepared.

Obama did not seem to be as attentive to Romney and did not seem as engaged.

Newsmax is already saying that Romney won this debate.

[BanginJimmy]

real question, how would someone ever do lasting damage to Obama? he has a legion of blind followers who have unconditional and unwavering affection for him.


There are more than 40mil voters that are going to vote one way or the other no matter what the candidate says. They break evenly on both sides of the aisle. No amount of debate will change their minds. These debates are for the small percentage of voters that actually vote the candidate, not the party.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Sinfix_15]

There are more than 40mil voters that are going to vote one way or the other no matter what the candidate says. They break evenly on both sides of the aisle. No amount of debate will change their minds. These debates are for the small percentage of voters that actually vote the candidate, not the party.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

That's a pretty depressing thought.

[Echonova]

Looked to me that Romney got under Obama's skin more than once. Judging purely on facial expressions.

As for the debate, I thought both did well pontificating about big plans with vague details. Obama mentioned Romney "has no real plan" more than once, but offered a vague plan himself. All in all I'd say it was a tie, if you already have a "guy" you're gonna think he won. But Obama did better than I thought he would, Romney did worse than I thought he would.

After the debate the talking heads (I was watching CBS) were saying "Wow, you needed a calculator for the first 30 minutes"... Bitch please. You need a modicum of common sense and 5th grade math skills.

[WhiteAccord]

Based on body language alone and how one presented their debate....

Romney: Staright forward to the point, KNEW what he was talking about, presented factual information, Even at one point Romney was clear and straight to the point in which Obama couldn't respond...

Obama: The man couldn't even look Romney in the eyes in his rebuttals, uhhhh, Couldn't present his facts straight(Ever watch a speech were he had teleprompters? The man could read, but face to face....:thinking:), uhhh, Obama presented "facts" in which were corrected in every one of Romney's rebuttal.

Simply put it... Romney

[Sinfix_15]

Looked to me that Romney got under Obama's skin more than once. Judging purely on facial expressions.

As for the debate, I thought both did well pontificating about big plans with vague details. Obama mentioned Romney "has no real plan" more than once, but offered a vague plan himself. All in all I'd say it was a tie, if you already have a "guy" you're gonna think he won. But Obama did better than I thought he would, Romney did worse than I thought he would.

After the debate the talking heads (I was watching CBS) were saying "Wow, you needed a calculator for the first 30 minutes"... Bitch please. You need a modicum of common sense and 5th grade math skills.

pretty unanimous across the wave of media that Romney is being declared the winner of this debate.

[Echonova]

pretty unanimous across the wave of media that Romney is being declared the winner of this debate.I'm just giving my opinion, I don't really care what the media says.

[Kamikaze]

he has a legion of blind followers who have unconditional and unwavering affection for him.

And Romney doesn't? I'd be willing to bet the majority of votes he will receive are from people who just don't like Obama. No matter how shady he is, he's still going to get votes from his sheep.

[Vteckidd]

Its not really big news that the challenger wins the 1st debate from the research I have seen and done. It validates the challenger, and as the incumbent you have to defend your record against someone new who has the advantage of proposing stuff you may have not done your research on.

I thought Romney looked MUCH more prepared, much sharper, much more commanding of the numbers and data. Obama looked lost, looked like he wanted to do what he normally does which is talk like a preacher, YES WE CAN, HOPE AND CHANGE, WE CAN DO THIS TOGETHER AMERICA, and ROmney didnt let him do that. He looked lost when challenged.

In 2008 Mccain COULDNT challenge OBama because he was stuck, Mccain couldnt endorse Bush POlicies because we were in the middle of a meltdown financially, ANd he had nothing really new to talk about. Obama sold this different kind of govt and such that , now, you can choose whether it worked or not.

Im not going to sit here and say he WON or he LOST because all that matters, is what the Frank Luntz Focus group showed:

13 people out of 24 voted for Obama in 2008, 12 said they were now heavily leaning toward Romney. 20/24 said Romney won hands down, Obama looked "meek, lost, unprepared, like he was being scolded".

That is a BIG PROBLEM for Obama

[.blank cd]

Im concerned that defense budget cuts weren't on Romneys list of cuts, and that PBS...is. And his regressive tax plan.

One thing was blatantly obvious, there were two conservative candidates on that stage.

[Sinfix_15]

And Romney doesn't? I'd be willing to bet the majority of votes he will receive are from people who just don't like Obama. No matter how shady he is, he's still going to get votes from his sheep.

lol at an Obama supporter calling someone a sheep.

[bookthief]

OBAMA: "I've proposed a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. ... The way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 in additional revenue."
THE FACTS: In promising $4 trillion, Obama is already banking more than $2 trillion from legislation enacted along with Republicans last year that cut agency operating budgets and capped them for 10 years. He also claims more than $800 billion in war savings that would occur anyway. And he uses creative bookkeeping to hide spending on Medicare reimbursements to doctors. Take those "cuts" away and Obama's $2.50/$1 ratio of spending cuts to tax increases shifts significantly more in the direction of tax increases.
Obama's February budget offered proposals that would cut deficits over the coming decade by $2 trillion instead of $4 trillion. Of that deficit reduction, tax increases accounted for $1.6 trillion. He promises relatively small spending cuts of $597 billion from big federal benefit programs like Medicare and Medicaid. He also proposed higher spending on infrastructure projects.
___
ROMNEY on cutting the deficit: "Obamacare's on my list. ... I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. ... I'll make government more efficient."
THE FACTS: Romney has promised to balance the budget in eight years to 10 years, but he hasn't offered a complete plan. Instead, he's promised a set of principles, some of which — like increasing Pentagon spending and restoring more than $700 billion in cuts that Democrats made in Medicare over the coming decade — work against his goal. He also has said he will not consider tax increases.
He pledges to shrink the government to 20 percent of the size of the economy, as opposed to more than 23 percent of gross domestic product now, by the end of his first term. The Romney campaign estimates that would require cuts of $500 billion from the 2016 budget alone. He also has pledged to cut tax rates by 20 percent, paying for them by eliminating tax breaks for the wealthiest and through economic growth.
To fulfill his promise, then, Romney would require cuts to other programs so deep — under one calculation requiring cutting many areas of the domestic budget by one-third within four years — that they could never get through Congress. Cuts to domestic agencies would have to be particularly deep.
But he's offered only a few modest examples of government programs he'd be willing to squeeze, like subsidies to PBS and Amtrak. He does want to repeal Obama's big health care law, but that law is actually forecast to reduce the deficit.
___
OBAMA: "Gov. Romney's central economic plan calls for a $5 trillion tax cut — on top of the extension of the Bush tax cuts, that's another trillion dollars — and $2 trillion in additional military spending that the military hasn't asked for. That's $8 trillion. How we pay for that, reduce the deficit, and make the investments that we need to make, without dumping those costs onto middle-class Americans, I think is one of the central questions of this campaign."
THE FACTS: Obama's claim that Romney wants to cut taxes by $5 trillion doesn't add up. Presumably, Obama was talking about the effect of Romney's tax plan over 10 years, which is common in Washington. But Obama's math doesn't take into account Romney's entire plan.
Romney proposes to reduce income tax rates by 20 percent and eliminate the estate tax and the alternative minimum tax. The Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group, says that would reduce federal tax revenues by $465 billion in 2015, which would add up to about $5 trillion over 10 years.
However, Romney says he wants to pay for the tax cuts by reducing or eliminating tax credits, deductions and exemptions. The goal is a simpler tax code that raises the same amount of money as the current system but does it in a more efficient manner.
The knock on Romney's plan, which Obama accurately cited, is that Romney has refused to say which tax breaks he would eliminate to pay for the lower rates.
___
ROMNEY: Obama's health care plan "puts in place an unelected board that's going to tell people ultimately what kind of treatments they can have. I don't like that idea."
THE FACTS: Romney is referring to the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a panel of experts that would have the power to force Medicare cuts if costs rise beyond certain levels and Congress fails to act. But Obama's health care law explicitly explicitly prohibits the board from rationing care, shifting costs to retirees, restricting benefits or raising the Medicare eligibility age. So the board doesn't have the power to dictate to doctors what treatments they can prescribe.
Romney seems to be resurrecting the assertion that Obama's law would lead to rationing, made famous by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's widely debunked allegation that it would create "death panels."
The board has yet to be named, and its members would ultimately have to be confirmed by the Senate. Health care inflation has been modest in the last few years, so cuts would be unlikely for most of the rest of this decade.
___
OBAMA: It's important "that we take some of the money that we're saving as we wind down two wars to rebuild America."
THE FACTS: This oft-repeated claim is based on a fiscal fiction. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were paid for mostly with borrowed money, so stopping them doesn't create a new pool of available cash that can be used for something else, like rebuilding America. It just slows down the government's borrowing.
___
ROMNEY: "At the same time, gasoline prices have doubled under the president. Electric rates are up."
THE FACTS: He's right that the average price has doubled, and a little more, since Obama was sworn in. But presidents have almost no influence on gasoline prices, and certainly not in the near term. Gasoline prices are set on financial exchanges around the world and are based on a host of factors, most importantly the price of crude oil used to make gasoline, the amount of finished gasoline ready to be shipped and the capacity of refiners to make enough to meet market demand.
Retail electricity prices have risen since Obama took office — barely. They've grown by an average of less than 1 percent per year, less than the rate of inflation and slower than the historical growth in electricity prices. The unexpectedly modest rise in electricity prices is because of the plummeting cost of natural gas, which is used to generate electricity.
___
OBAMA: "Independent studies looking at this said the only way to meet Gov. Romney's pledge of not ... adding to the deficit is by burdening middle-class families. The average middle-class family with children would pay about $2,000 more."
THE FACTS: That's just one scenario. Obama's claim relies on a study by the Tax Policy Center, a Washington research group. The study, however, is more nuanced than Obama indicated.
The study concludes it would be impossible for Romney to meet all of his stated goals without shifting some of the tax burden from people who make more than $200,000 to people who make less.
In one scenario, the study says, Romney's proposal could result in a $2,000 tax increase for families who make less than $200,000 and have children.
Romney says his plan wouldn't raise taxes on anyone, and his campaign points to several studies by conservative think tanks that dispute the Tax Policy Center's findings. Most of the conservative studies argue that Romney's tax plan would stimulate economic growth, generating additional tax revenue without shifting any of the tax burden to the middle class. Congress, however, doesn't use those kinds of projections when it estimates the effect of tax legislation.
___

[.blank cd]

^ I like you

[.blank cd]

lol at an Obama supporter calling someone a sheep.

Hey now pot, lets not start calling kettle names...

[Sinfix_15]

Small sample of what the avg Obama supporter posts on twitter. Obama supporters are clearly educated and well informed on their voting decision.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A4VPRRWCcAA2afd.jpg:large

[bookthief]

^ I like you



Lol, thanks :)

[bookthief]

Small sample of what the avg Obama supporter posts on twitter. Obama supporters are clearly educated and well informed on their voting decision.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A4VPRRWCcAA2afd.jpg:large





HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! [>.<] BLOCKHEADS!

[.blank cd]

Small sample of what the avg Obama supporter posts on twitter. Obama supporters are clearly educated and well informed on their voting decision.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A4VPRRWCcAA2afd.jpg:large

How is this one picture even close to a representative sample of people that voted for Obama?

Care to give an equally generalized sample of Romney voters? Or is every single Romney voter a brilliant intellectual?

[Sinfix_15]

How is this one picture even close to a representative sample of people that voted for Obama?

Care to give an equally generalized sample of Romney voters? Or is every single Romney voter a brilliant intellectual?

Come on Blank, you know you're aware of this. Obama clearly has the support of the "facebook generation". There's a lot more misfits on your side of the isle.

"my president is black" was trending on twitter.....

[.blank cd]

Come on Blank, you know you're aware of this. Obama clearly has the support of the "facebook generation". There's a lot more misfits on your side of the isle.And you came to this conclusion...how? By one tweeted picture on one trending topic? Do you not think that's a tad biased?

[Sinfix_15]

And you came to this conclusion...how? By one tweeted picture on one trending topic? Do you not think that's a tad biased?

Using twitter as a source...... the avg Obama supporter has the IQ of a cantaloupe. Feel free to jump on twitter and click the hashtags "Obama2012" "my president is black" or anything else of the sort. You would honestly have to dig and try very hard to find a reasonable Obama supporter... and when you did... it would be buried in a sea of morons.

[.blank cd]

Using twitter as a source...... the avg Obama supporter has the IQ of a cantaloupe. Feel free to jump on twitter and click the hashtags "Obama2012" "my president is black" or anything else of the sort. You would honestly have to dig and try very hard to find a reasonable Obama supporter... and when you did... it would be buried in a sea of morons.

So out of almost 70 million people (who previously voted for Obama) you're saying it'd be difficult to find a reasonable Obama voter?

[Sinfix_15]

oh man..... Ryan vs Biden....................... make sure to have some liquor on standby when you watch that one Blank.

[Sinfix_15]

So out of almost 70 million people (who previously voted for Obama) you're saying it'd be difficult to find a reasonable Obama voter?

No, a good way to summarize what im saying would be...................

Not every Obama supporter is welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports, but every welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports is an Obama supporter.

I'm not saying that all Obama supporters are "misfits". I'm saying that most misfits seem to be Obama supporters. What % of the base they make up.... who knows...

[Sinfix_15]

Cant wait for Biden..................

[.blank cd]

No, a good way to summarize what im saying would be...................

Not every Obama supporter is welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports, but every welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports is an Obama supporter.Theres a couple million voters on welfare at the moment. You're saying not a single one of them voted republican?

[Sinfix_15]

Theres a couple million voters on welfare at the moment. You're saying not a single one of them voted republican?

My description covered a little more than welfare. Anyways, time for bed. I'm greatly looking forward to Biden and Ryan debate.

[Sinfix_15]

cant seem to go to sleep............... here's another small taste of twitter gold.
http://d3j5vwomefv46c.cloudfront.net/photos/large/666488316.jpg?key=15362048&Expires=1349342237&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIYVGSUJFNRFZBBTA&Signature=bq0gLIbmft3JwMPIlNB8FggtHV5YVQG3wKmQKeOP Ndp72l8X55vIUKf-ncQlRhhyy~CBdbBQmUd8uiD71rynR0RWjVkUmRr3UdyPZaoiII SflPUr57BdZToHTlAUpGFGC9aSvR3S~sIu98LjGP56kJQTmc-hJdqZRne1aFRAxkk_

[Elbow]

Personally I am 100% pushed away from Romney from that debate because of what he said about fixing the deficit. The dude is a moron.

Not to mention I'm not voting for someone that supports "magic underwear."

[Elbow]

No, a good way to summarize what im saying would be...................

Not every Obama supporter is welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports, but every welfare riding moron who sells their food stamps to buy newports is an Obama supporter.

I'm not saying that all Obama supporters are "misfits". I'm saying that most misfits seem to be Obama supporters. What % of the base they make up.... who knows...

Where do you make this up at?

I've personally SEEN stupid white trash hicks do exactly as you're describing and they HATE Obama.

"The funna take our gunz!"
"I can't get no job cause of OBAMA!"
"He a muslim negro!"

[Sammich]

i appreciate everyone in this thread that is being rational and actually being realistic about both candidates. watching sinfix post up on this is like walking on lava even though it hurts

[David88vert]

I believe that Obama got his message across last night. If you like what he has done over the last 4 years, re-elect him, and he will do more of the same.

If your life is not better off now than it was 4 years ago, I don't think that it means that you should blindly vote for Romney. Voters need to look closely to see what his policies will do at a national scale. State programs do not always scale to national level.

[Vteckidd]

I think a lot of you need to take a GOVT 101 class:

1) Neither candidate was specific about ANYTHING. Obama has NOT covered what he would specifically cut, nor has Romney. Huistory shows that CUTS in SPENDING NEVER HAPPEN. Its a talking point. Taxes will go up , but the politicians wont EVER responsibly cut spending.

2) Romney will not be specific, its not his job. That is the legislature. The PRESIDENTS job is to provide a basic vision, which Romney has done , and get congress to pass legislature in a bipartisan manner that supports that vision. Last time i checked the president cannot pass any laws by himself.

3) Obama has done the exact same thing Romney is doing, he provides NO SPECIFICS, its "HIRE 1 million more teachers, build roads and bridges" but none of that ACTUALLY happens. NO SPECIFICS on where that revenue comes from, and the tax increases he talks about on the wealthy he does not specifically mention how that money will be spent.

4) Romney made a great point about the energy subsidies. Obama complains about the 2.8 Billion in oil company subsidies while dumping 90 million down the drain on Green Energy or more (if you count solyndra).

Romney KNOWS he cannot balance the budget and unfortunately he wont say it. Its too bad , he should. Obama has made it so that NO ONE can responsibly balance the budget anytime soon, you cant with 1 trillion+ deficits. The spendign cuts it would take to balance the budget would piss off too many voters.

Obama cant tax his was to balancing the budget because the CBO says even letting the Bush Tax Cuts end for the wealthy amounts to less than 100 billion dollars.

you realize 100 billion is 1/10th his DEFICITS. Its like paying $100 on a $1000 credit card (with interest that amounts to $70 a month).

The only way to get us fiscally responsible is to get the economy growing and adding jobs from the private sector, you can choose who to believe will do that better, but it wont happen overnight.

Romney should just come out an say "i cant balance the budget, not in my first 4 years, but i promise to spend less than XXXX"

I dont see how people can bitch about not having a job but then back subsidies for left organizations like PBS.

Its time the govt stops spending OUR MONEY on shit WE DONT NEED.

[Sinfix_15]

Where do you make this up at?

I've personally SEEN stupid white trash hicks do exactly as you're describing and they HATE Obama.

"The funna take our gunz!"
"I can't get no job cause of OBAMA!"
"He a muslim negro!"

I see those people also.... but 97% of white people didnt vote for Mccain did they?

[Sammich]

I think a lot of you need to take a GOVT 101 class:

1) Neither candidate was specific about ANYTHING. Obama has NOT covered what he would specifically cut, nor has Romney. Huistory shows that CUTS in SPENDING NEVER HAPPEN. Its a talking point. Taxes will go up , but the politicians wont EVER responsibly cut spending.

2) Romney will not be specific, its not his job. That is the legislature. The PRESIDENTS job is to provide a basic vision, which Romney has done , and get congress to pass legislature in a bipartisan manner that supports that vision. Last time i checked the president cannot pass any laws by himself.

3) Obama has done the exact same thing Romney is doing, he provides NO SPECIFICS, its "HIRE 1 million more teachers, build roads and bridges" but none of that ACTUALLY happens. NO SPECIFICS on where that revenue comes from, and the tax increases he talks about on the wealthy he does not specifically mention how that money will be spent.

4) Romney made a great point about the energy subsidies. Obama complains about the 2.8 Billion in oil company subsidies while dumping 90 million down the drain on Green Energy or more (if you count solyndra).

Romney KNOWS he cannot balance the budget and unfortunately he wont say it. Its too bad , he should. Obama has made it so that NO ONE can responsibly balance the budget anytime soon, you cant with 1 trillion+ deficits. The spendign cuts it would take to balance the budget would piss off too many voters.

Obama cant tax his was to balancing the budget because the CBO says even letting the Bush Tax Cuts end for the wealthy amounts to less than 100 billion dollars.

you realize 100 billion is 1/10th his DEFICITS. Its like paying $100 on a $1000 credit card (with interest that amounts to $70 a month).

The only way to get us fiscally responsible is to get the economy growing and adding jobs from the private sector, you can choose who to believe will do that better, but it wont happen overnight.

Romney should just come out an say "i cant balance the budget, not in my first 4 years, but i promise to spend less than XXXX"

I dont see how people can bitch about not having a job but then back subsidies for left organizations like PBS.

Its time the govt stops spending OUR MONEY on shit WE DONT NEED.

http://i.minus.com/ibrVCOf3axowHE.gif

[Kamikaze]

lol at an Obama supporter calling someone a sheep.

When did I state I was voting for Obama? Or at all for that matter? I already know how misinformed you are on a vast number of things by discussions in other threads. Unfortunately this is the plight of a lot of Americans. Not well enough informed to make a proper decision regarding politics. Using Fox News and Twitter as reputable sources. I mean really?

[Sinfix_15]

When did I state I was voting for Obama? Or at all for that matter? I already know how misinformed you are on a vast number of things by discussions in other threads. Unfortunately this is the plight of a lot of Americans. Not well enough informed to make a proper decision regarding politics. Using Fox News and Twitter as reputable sources. I mean really?

I dont watch fox news. You realize twitter is nothing more than a messenger right? and i could find links to any and every news media in the world there right?

Insulting me for using twitter as media would be about the same as saying " you're stupid, you use a TV to get news "

If you dont mind...... point me in the direction of a credible news source please. It will be on twitter.

[Kamikaze]

i appreciate everyone in this thread that is being rational and actually being realistic about both candidates. watching sinfix post up on this is like walking on lava even though it hurts

It's going to be difficult to have a rational discussion with people like him interjecting "opinions" if you can even call them that. Everything he posts seems to have a racial/prejudice undertone to it. And you know trying to have an intelligent discussion with those types is like trying to fight someone with a handicap.

[.blank cd]

If you dont mind...... point me in the direction of a credible news source please. It will be on twitter.#mypresidentisblack is not even close to a representative sample of black Obama voters. Sorry.

[Kamikaze]

I dont watch fox news. You realize twitter is nothing more than a messenger right? and i could find links to any and every news media in the world there right?

Insulting me for using twitter as media would be about the same as saying " you're stupid, you use a TV to get news "

If you dont mind...... point me in the direction of a credible news source please. It will be on twitter.

I doubt the rubbish you posted was created by a reputable news source. And if it was, and that's where you get your information, then there's the problem.

TV is how most American's get their news, and that's okay. At least they get SOME news albeit biased. But most don't go and research to see if they've heard the real truth because 1) they're too lazy or 2) they don't have the ability to understand and digest it.

[Sinfix_15]

It's going to be difficult to have a rational discussion with people like him interjecting "opinions" if you can even call them that. Everything he posts seems to have a racial/prejudice undertone to it. And you know trying to have an intelligent discussion with those types is like trying to fight someone with a handicap.

"those types" is the picture the left paints of anyone who isnt supporting Obama.



Glen Browder: Is the South a Nation of Toothless, Ignorant, Racist Rednecks? (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glen-browder/south-stereotypes_b_1357935.html)

[Sinfix_15]

I doubt the rubbish you posted was created by a reputable news source. And if it was, and that's where you get your information, then there's the problem.

TV is how most American's get their news, and that's okay. At least they get SOME news albeit biased. But most don't go and research to see if they've heard the real truth because 1) they're too lazy or 2) they don't have the ability to understand and digest it.

I watch at least an hour of news on TV a day and read a variety of things on the internet. Watch all of the debates, watch the TV anytime the president is speaking. If there's something else i should be doing, please tell me. I'm legitimately asking.

[Kamikaze]

"those types" is the picture the left paints of anyone who isnt supporting Obama.

You do the same thing for people who support Obama. In your opinion from what I've gathered, Obama supporters are either uneducated, freeloaders, ignorant, on welfare, etc.

[Kamikaze]

I watch at least an hour of news on TV a day and read a variety of things on the internet. Watch all of the debates, watch the TV anytime the president is speaking. If there's something else i should be doing, please tell me. I'm legitimately asking.

Either what you're reading is just as skewed as the TV or you're formulating your opinions based on emotions/beliefs/biases rather than facts. Your hate for Obama is preventing you from being rational. I don't think any rational person would say either candidate is the perfect choice. I'll admit that Romney has some standpoints that I agree with. However, I can't trust someone who could probably make tax evasion into an Olympic sport yet says a vast number of Americans are leeches on the system.

[Vteckidd]

I'll admit that Romney has some standpoints that I agree with. However, I can't trust someone who could probably make tax evasion into an Olympic sport yet says a vast majority of Americans are leeches on the system.
Hold up

Tax EVASION, is ILLEGAL

Hiring armies of accountants to make sure your tax burden is the lowest it can possibly be, is 100% legal and incredibly smart.

Are you telling me you wouldnt look for EVERY opportunity to lessen your tax burden? I mean, we all bargain people on TVs, cars, houses, rent, clothes, etc why would you NOT do it on taxes?

Every tax shelter Romney has used (offshore accounts, loop holes) etc exist because the IRS LETS IT EXIST. Its EXISTED UNDER EVERY PRESIDENT FOR THE LAST 30 years. John Kerry PURPOSEFULLY PARKED HIS BOAT in a different harbor to AVOID PAYING his home states taxes on it.
John Kerry Saves $500,000 By Docking 76-Foot Luxury Yacht Out Of State (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/john-kerry-saves-500000-b_n_656985.html)

I mean these guys do it all the time, Democrat AND republican.

Romney has done nothing illegal, if he had, the IRS would be all over him.

[Sinfix_15]

Either what you're reading is just as skewed as the TV or you're formulating your opinions based on emotions/beliefs/biases rather than facts. Your hate for Obama is preventing you from being rational. I don't think any rational person would say either candidate is the perfect choice. I'll admit that Romney has some standpoints that I agree with. However, I can't trust someone who could probably make tax evasion into an Olympic sport yet says a vast number of Americans are leeches on the system.

Romney gave $7million to charity last year and paid $3million in taxes. Lot more than me. You're forming an emotional opinion and judging Romney's character based on his legal tax practices, yet it's wrong for me to judge Obama for his merits and character?


edit, looks like Vteck beat me to the punch.

[Sinfix_15]

The % of taxes is playing politics in my opinion.....

why dont we word it like this? Romney paid $3million in taxes and "Joe the plumber" paid $500 in taxes. Are we really complaining that the government needs more money? the more you give them, the more they spend. Spending is the problem. Romney should be complaining about the return on his $3million investment. Seems like taxes are just throwing money into an endless whole right now.

[Kamikaze]

Hold up

Tax EVASION, is ILLEGAL

Hiring armies of accountants to make sure your tax burden is the lowest it can possibly be, is 100% legal and incredibly smart.

Are you telling me you wouldnt look for EVERY opportunity to lessen your tax burden? I mean, we all bargain people on TVs, cars, houses, rent, clothes, etc why would you NOT do it on taxes?

Every tax shelter Romney has used (offshore accounts, loop holes) etc exist because the IRS LETS IT EXIST. Its EXISTED UNDER EVERY PRESIDENT FOR THE LAST 30 years. John Kerry PURPOSEFULLY PARKED HIS BOAT in a different harbor to AVOID PAYING his home states taxes on it.
John Kerry Saves $500,000 By Docking 76-Foot Luxury Yacht Out Of State (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/23/john-kerry-saves-500000-b_n_656985.html)

I mean these guys do it all the time, Democrat AND republican.

Romney has done nothing illegal, if he had, the IRS would be all over him.

You can manipulate it any way you want. Apply whatever terminology you want. Making money here and not paying the taxes on it whether the IRS (what a joke) says it's legal or not isn't right. Especially when you're bold enough to call out the bottom rung and label them leeches for not paying taxes. If he's man enough to do that and wants everyone to pull their own weight, he needs to do it too. Just because he (and the others that do it) is clever enough to find a legal loophole doesn't make it morally right. Don't give me any of this legal nonsense. There are things that should be illegal that are legal, and things that are legal that should be illegal. The almighty dollar dictates what side of the equation an action falls on, especially when dealing with financial matters.

[Sinfix_15]

You can manipulate it any way you want. Apply whatever terminology you want. Making money here and not paying the taxes on it whether the IRS (what a joke) says it's legal or not isn't right. Especially when you're bold enough to call out the bottom rung and label them leeches for not paying taxes. If he's man enough to do that and wants everyone to pull their own weight, he needs to do it too. Just because he (and the others that do it) is clever enough to find a legal loophole doesn't make it morally right. Don't give me any of this legal nonsense. There are things that should be illegal that are legal, and things that are legal that should be illegal. The almighty dollar dictates what side of the equation an action falls on, especially when dealing with financial matters.

So the problem with america is that Obama did not have enough money to work with? if people like Romney paid in more taxes everything would have been ok?


"everyone pull their own weight" ? Romney probably paid more taxes than everyone on this site combined. I try to pay as little of taxes as possible. I would imagine everyone does. Some how this makes Romney a bad person.

[Kamikaze]

Romney gave $7million to charity last year and paid $3million in taxes. Lot more than me. You're forming an emotional opinion and judging Romney's character based on his legal tax practices, yet it's wrong for me to judge Obama for his merits and character?


edit, looks like Vteck beat me to the punch.

I didn't say it was wrong, I said don't skew it. Don't try and make it seem that one candidate is a saint and the other the devil. Either call it like it is, or don't do it at all.

[masanomi3]

I personally don't care who win's we are screwed either way.

[Kamikaze]

So the problem with america is that Obama did not have enough money to work with? if people like Romney paid in more taxes everything would have been ok?

No, I don't think that would solve anything. And this is one of those points where I'm in line with Romney. The wealthy are under the impression that everyone in the middle and lower class wants their money. That is not the case. What they want is a fair shot. But if basic needs aren't being met, then imagine how much more difficult it would be for someone to come up from the bottom. Now for those who are too lazy to get up and put in the effort to do so, that sounds like a personal problem. But why hold back opportunity for everyone else just because of those few?


"everyone pull their own weight" ? Romney probably paid more taxes than everyone on this site combined. I try to pay as little of taxes as possible. I would imagine everyone does. Some how this makes Romney a bad person.

That's simple math. You make more therefore you pay more. But that's in quantitative terms, not in percentage of income. With constant percentages across the board, the lower you go in income the more it's going to be felt.

[Sammich]

I personally don't care who win's we are screwed either way.

exactly how i see it. it's like yall are saying...i'd rather a rattlesnake bite me, than a copperhead

[Sinfix_15]

exactly how i see it. it's like yall are saying...i'd rather a rattlesnake bite me, than a copperhead

Well, when you know the starting QB sucks, you put in the backup QB. Unfair for you to predict the stat line of the backup QB before he steps on the field.

If either of you honestly feel this way, you should vote for Romney. Sticking with failure is never the solution. This is what annoys me... most people are willing to admit Obama is doing a poor job, but still seem to refuse change.

If you admit Obama sucks, but you think Romney will suck too, the correct action is to start with removing Obama. The American way is not to accept mediocrity. Maybe Romney wont do any better than Obama, maybe he will.... but we know what we have with Obama and i dont want any more of it.

[Sammich]

WHOEVER is in office shit will be fukd up, period. This has nothing to do w/ football statistics, we (at least i know i am in this aspect) are talking plain 1-2-3 english, this shit will be fukd up. I'm not voting for anyone, nor will i ever. when i see you post what you posted, this is what i see you saying

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2mCMF222IQ

[Vteckidd]

You can manipulate it any way you want. Apply whatever terminology you want. Making money here and not paying the taxes on it whether the IRS (what a joke) says it's legal or not isn't right. Especially when you're bold enough to call out the bottom rung and label them leeches for not paying taxes. If he's man enough to do that and wants everyone to pull their own weight, he needs to do it too. Just because he (and the others that do it) is clever enough to find a legal loophole doesn't make it morally right. Don't give me any of this legal nonsense. There are things that should be illegal that are legal, and things that are legal that should be illegal. The almighty dollar dictates what side of the equation an action falls on, especially when dealing with financial matters.

So you're saying people should only follow rules they think are correct?

Quite possibly the dumbest thing posted in this thread.

He pays more than you in taxes, and never called anyone a leech. It is not his fault you aren't a millionaire .

Calling Romney guilty of tax invasion is like me calling you a rapist for sleeping with your gf because I think premarital sex is "morally wrong"

[BanginJimmy]

You can manipulate it any way you want. Apply whatever terminology you want. Making money here and not paying the taxes on it whether the IRS (what a joke) says it's legal or not isn't right. Especially when you're bold enough to call out the bottom rung and label them leeches for not paying taxes. If he's man enough to do that and wants everyone to pull their own weight, he needs to do it too. Just because he (and the others that do it) is clever enough to find a legal loophole doesn't make it morally right. Don't give me any of this legal nonsense. There are things that should be illegal that are legal, and things that are legal that should be illegal. The almighty dollar dictates what side of the equation an action falls on, especially when dealing with financial matters.

So you pay 100% of your marginal tax rate every year.

Based only on that fact I conclude you are too stupid for this forum.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Vteckidd]

You can manipulate it any way you want. Apply whatever terminology you want. Making money here and not paying the taxes on it whether the IRS (what a joke) says it's legal or not isn't right. Especially when you're bold enough to call out the bottom rung and label them leeches for not paying taxes. If he's man enough to do that and wants everyone to pull their own weight, he needs to do it too. Just because he (and the others that do it) is clever enough to find a legal loophole doesn't make it morally right. Don't give me any of this legal nonsense. There are things that should be illegal that are legal, and things that are legal that should be illegal. The almighty dollar dictates what side of the equation an action falls on, especially when dealing with financial matters.

You also realize the incredible double standard you're using because Obama IIRC had an effective tax rate of 20% so obviously you feel he is a tax evader as well for following what is legal

[Kamikaze]

So you pay 100% of your marginal tax rate every year.

Based only on that fact I conclude you are too stupid for this forum.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

Lol I'm a full time student so I don't have any to pay. Who's the stupid one now? You might want to stop making assumptions, it's not a good look.

[Kamikaze]

You also realize the incredible double standard you're using because Obama IIRC had an effective tax rate of 20% so obviously you feel he is a tax evader as well for following what is legal

Does Obama hide money off shore? Was he always in that tax bracket? He isn't the one who hasn't released his tax returns. Don't try and twist my words to say I think there's something wrong with being wealthy. Romney chose to open his mouth, therefore he's open to criticism.

[Kamikaze]

So you're saying people should only follow rules they think are correct?

Quite possibly the dumbest thing posted in this thread.

He pays more than you in taxes, and never called anyone a leech. It is not his fault you aren't a millionaire .

Calling Romney guilty of tax invasion is like me calling you a rapist for sleeping with your gf because I think premarital sex is "morally wrong"

Oh my goodness. Please don't be dense. I'll try and rephrase it so you can understand when I get back.

[Echonova]

Lol I'm a full time student so I don't have any to pay. Who's the stupid one now? You might want to stop making assumptions, it's not a good look.Wait until you graduate, get a good paying job and are actually subject to our progressive tax code. Then you can speak to how "fair" it is. Right now taxes is just a theoretical exercise for you. Everything works good in theory... Even a rotary motor.


As to Romney's taxes... He released his taxes, now he didn't release the 74 years worth that the "left" was asking for. But why would he? He's under no obligation to. Just like Obama was under no legal obligation to release his birth certificate (which I think he shouldn't have, and the fact Obama was born in the Hawaii is beyond debate). He took legal tax breaks, and most of his money was earned through investments. Which is taxed at a lower rate because you invest with money you've already paid taxes on it once. Same tax breaks that Obama took. If you think it's not "right", then work to change the system. Making assumptions and/or casting aspersions based on what you think is "moral" is far too subjective. What makes you the arbiter of what's moral and what's not? Who are you to judge another man?

[BanginJimmy]

Lol I'm a full time student so I don't have any to pay. Who's the stupid one now? You might want to stop making assumptions, it's not a good look.

Even better. Someone with zero experience in the work force telling how much someone should be paying in taxes.

You are right I assumed you were just too stupid. Now I know you are dumb AND ignorant.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

Even better. Someone with zero experience in the work force telling how much someone should be paying in taxes.

You are right I assumed you were just too stupid. Now I know you are dumb AND ignorant.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

I'm gonna have to jump in and vouch for his experience in the work force. Actually, it's exactly the kind of experience Romney is trying so hard to champion, yet failing so hard to go into detail about. Work experience aside, full time students represent a significant portion of the population

[Kamikaze]

Lol I must have pushed a button the way you try to take cheap shots, big man. Resorting to that is pretty pathetic and I won't waste any more time responding to you.

Echo, you make a valid point. However my "judgement" was only a response to him judging that 47% he spoke about. I just don't see how it's ok for him to do so while avoiding paying the most tax as possible.

[Vteckidd]

Lol I must have pushed a button the way you try to take cheap shots, big man. Resorting to that is pretty pathetic and I won't waste any more time responding to you.

Im a fellow college person as well so i will not hold that against you. Congrats for continuing your education.


I just don't see how it's ok for him to do so while avoiding paying the most tax as possible.

EVERYONE avoids paying the most amount of tax as possible. Are you serious? Think about that statement.

Do you buy a car from a private seller or dealership? Most people would rather do private because IT AVOIDS SALES TAX.

H+R Block, Liberty Tax Services, all that stuff EXISTS TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE A) PAY THE LOWEST AMOUNT OF TAX B) GET THE MOST REFUND BACK.

The problem is our Tax code is so complicated that when you have 100+ million in investments you need an army of accountants to do your taxes.

your argument holds no water because you are holding Romney to a standard that you refuse to hold Obama too. You also realize that capital gains tax is not congruent to Income tax.

[.blank cd]

your argument holds no water because you are holding Romney to a standard that you refuse to hold Obama too. You also realize that capital gains tax is not congruent to Income tax.To be fair, Obama, and multiple other millionaires, has said multiple times that he himself doesn't need tax breaks and and that tax increases wouldn't hurt people like him

[Browning151]

To be fair, Obama, and multiple other millionaires, has said multiple times that he himself doesn't need tax breaks and and that tax increases wouldn't hurt people like him

Did Obama take a standard deduction or did he itemize his last tax return? He does the same thing as everyone else, pays as little as possible even though he says the increase wouldn't hurt him. Go ahead, lead by example and take the standard deduction and pay more in taxes if you truly feel that's the way to make things more "fair", otherwise you're just blowing smoke up everyones ass just like the next guy.

[Vteckidd]

To be fair, Obama, and multiple other millionaires, has said multiple times that he himself doesn't need tax breaks and and that tax increases wouldn't hurt people like him

taht is not the argument though, so lets stick with the original incorrect statement.

Until those laws are passed or changed, the current law is the law of the land. Romney can talk all they want about repealing obamacare, but its the law of the land so sayeth the supreme court.

Tax increases wont hurt in terms of bankrupting them, correct
Tax increases WILL HURT THE MIDDLE CLASS (if they are put on the wealthy) , well i believe that to be true.

[BanginJimmy]

I'm gonna have to jump in and vouch for his experience in the work force. Actually, it's exactly the kind of experience Romney is trying so hard to champion, yet failing so hard to go into detail about. Work experience aside, full time students represent a significant portion of the population

What experience is that? An investor? He has already said he pays no taxes.


Echo, you make a valid point. However my "judgement" was only a response to him judging that 47% he spoke about. I just don't see how it's ok for him to do so while avoiding paying the most tax as possible.

Why should he not judge the fact that Obama supporters think high income earner should pay more taxes while they themselves pay little no taxes federal income taxes?

To say anyone should be paying as many taxes as possible is absolutely stupid. Why should any sane person give this govt 1 penny more than they legally have to? More to the point, what good would it do to do it?

Check out this chart.

http://new-cdn.financialsamurai.com.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/toptaxes.jpg


http://www.financialsamurai.com/2011/04/12/how-much-money-do-the-top-income-earners-make-percent/


The top 50% of income earners are paying far more than their fair share. Time for the lower end to pick up their end.

[Sinfix_15]

Does Obama hide money off shore? Was he always in that tax bracket? He isn't the one who hasn't released his tax returns. Don't try and twist my words to say I think there's something wrong with being wealthy. Romney chose to open his mouth, therefore he's open to criticism.

If i could hide my money from this government, i would to. Romney paid $3million in taxes, that $3million was wasted by a spend happy government. If he paid $15million, that $15million would have been wasted by a spend happy government.

[Vteckidd]

If i could hide my money from this government, i would to. Romney paid $3million in taxes, that $3million was wasted by a spend happy government. If he paid $15million, that $15million would have been wasted by a spend happy government.
Romney doesnt HIDE MONEY overseas. He uses perfectly legal tax loopholes to park money in offshore accounts. EVERY RICH MOTHERFUCKER DOES IT

WARREN BUFFET
BILL GATES
JEFFREY IMMELT
SOROS
JOHN KERRY

THEY ALL DO IT, WHY IS THIS NEWS WORTHY??????

I dont remember the LEFT skewering John Kerry for being wealthy when he ran for president.

[.blank cd]

Romney doesnt HIDE MONEY overseas. He uses perfectly legal tax loopholes to park money in offshore accounts. EVERY RICH MOTHERFUCKER DOES IT

WARREN BUFFET
BILL GATES
JEFFREY IMMELT
SOROS.None of these people are trying to be president either. And Immelt is not the greatest example. Lol.

[Vteckidd]

None of these people are trying to be president either. And Immelt is not the greatest example. Lol.

KERRy WASNT TRYING TO BE PRESIDENT???

Warren Buffet is ok to write big donor checks to Obama but hey, who the fuck cares?

Bad behavior is bad behavior, you cant selectively pick your outrage.

That is my biggest problem with partisan politics, hold the same standard to EVERYONE. Like the UE numbers out today, I KNOW they are skewed, i KNOW they are fudging the numbers, but we werent quoting UE6 when Bush and Clinton were in office, why are we doing it now?

[Echonova]

LOUD NOISES!!!!

[.blank cd]

KERRy WASNT TRYING TO BE PRESIDENT???None of them are CURRENTLY trying to be president, and if you look again, you'll see I removed Kerry from your quote. ;-)



That is my biggest problem with partisan politics, hold the same standard to EVERYONE. Like the UE numbers out today, I KNOW they are skewed, i KNOW they are fudging the numbers, but we werent quoting UE6 when Bush and Clinton were in office, why are we doing it now?I referenced exactly how they came to the UE numbers they posted, in the other thread.

http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/us-jobless-rate-falls-7-8-pct-44-123110986--finance.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US

This says they ran a poll of Americans pretty much asking them if they had a job or not, with a pretty significant sample size. As long as they are consistent with their data collection method and data comparisons (I.e. they used the same method throughout the term) then I see no problem in using that figure as a reference.

[David88vert]

None of them are CURRENTLY trying to be president, and if you look again, you'll see I removed Kerry from your quote. ;-)


I referenced exactly how they came to the UE numbers they posted, in the other thread.

US jobless rate falls to 7.8 pct., 44-month low (http://m.yahoo.com/w/legobpengine/news/us-jobless-rate-falls-7-8-pct-44-123110986--finance.html?orig_host_hdr=news.yahoo.com&.intl=US&.lang=en-US)

This says they ran a poll of Americans pretty much asking them if they had a job or not, with a pretty significant sample size. As long as they are consistent with their data collection method and data comparisons (I.e. they used the same method throughout the term) then I see no problem in using that figure as a reference.


That is a very small amount of people to sample compared to the number of people in the US. Its a much smaller percentage than the economist poll that IA Obama supporters wanted to ignore. Seems that Obama supporters have a lot of difficulty holding everyone to the same standards yet they want to claim that they are looking for fairness all the time.

As to the numbers I suspect that they are correct. Plenty of people that used to have high paying full time jobs have been forced to take part time low pay jobs to survive and the reports have noted that for quite a while.

[Vteckidd]

If you understand anything about the numbers all it shows is that
A) people are leaving the work force and not being counted
B) people are taking part time work instead of full time
C) the UE number reported is correct, but only because the way to lower the number is to eliminate the size of the people looking for jobs

114000 jobs is anemic, you have to have 250k to keep up with population growth. ALl sectors are DOWN, manufacturing, consumer spending, confidence, etc

[MachNU]

Some people in this thread need to read Stanley/Dunlops "Millionaire Next Door" you might get a better understanding of why rich people are rich. It will explain why people who make millions a year only pay 10-15% in Tax, yet people who make $50k a year pay 23%.

[MachNU]

To help with one key phrase that sums everything up.... "Non-Taxable Income."

[ahabion]

To the OP, the non-verbal cues throughout the debate was owned by Romney. Pres. Obama was intimidated like crazy.

Afterwards, I asked myself, "If I were black, would I be so overwhelmingly sold out to the POTUS that I could not vote for anyone else?" That's when I found this video on YouTube. Interesting point of view.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOpTp6ZgMDA&

[Echonova]

http://forgifs.com/gallery/d/63674-1/Cats_JJdotAM064.jpg? (http://forgifs.com)

[Sinfix_15]

None of these people are trying to be president either. And Immelt is not the greatest example. Lol.

So, even though Romney's tax practices are legal, we're digging into this issue for the sole purpose of saying Romney is a bad guy, but Obama spending half of his life listening to Jeramiah Wright says nothing about his character?

[BanginJimmy]

yet people who make $50k a year pay 23%.

The people paying 23% are idiots. As I have said many times, I pay about 8% on over 110k in income.


I guess I am another of the evil people depriving the govt of their hard earned money.

[Echonova]

The people paying 23% are idiots. As I have said many times, I pay about 8% on over 110k in income.


I guess I am another of the evil people depriving the govt of their hard earned money.I get what you're saying, but having had years where I earned median income levels (or less), there is no point to itemizing taxes when you make that little. 1040ez form and you were done. Didn't make enough to justify an accountant, didn't have investments or anything other than the paycheck I lived week to week on. Which is all part of the grand scheme, make it hard and complicated (tax code is only 78,000 pages) and the sheeple will do what is easy and not question it. I cringe every time I hear people talk about how much money they are "getting back" come tax time. The "middle class" are societies worker bees, and yes we live in a country where anything is possible... Doesn't mean everybody can, will or (to a lesser extent) need to move up.

However, I have yet to hear a persuasive argument on how taxing the "rich" more helps anyone in the middle/lower class. Does it make the poor guy "feel" better knowing that "evil rich guy is getting screwed"? Did that make the poor guy's life any better? As it's been said ad nauseam... Our government has a spending problem, doesn't matter if a Democrat or Republican is in charge.

I have a budget for my household, why doesn't my government?

[BanginJimmy]

This is how I see Romney's lower taxes less loopholes gimmick actually working.

The people that are making millions wont be affected either way. Most are making a large portion of that income from investments anyways.

If I am paying 40% of my income in taxes, I am going to spend the time and money to get every deduction and slip through every loophole I can. Drop the rate to something I believe is more fair, I am going to spend a lot less time and money shielding my cash.

In the end, I may pay a higher taxes because of less planning simply because of the lower rate.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[MachNU]

The people paying 23% are idiots. As I have said many times, I pay about 8% on over 110k in income.


I guess I am another of the evil people depriving the govt of their hard earned money.

You understand non-taxable income. lol

[BanginJimmy]

You understand non-taxable income. lol

I understand making as much of my money non-taxable as possible.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2