Jump to content

Welcome Back Carter....


Domer Dude
 Share

Recommended Posts

wow, major, major gaffe for Mitt and his campaign. How does this happen? Seriously!!

 

Pretty telling how he views the average American.

I don't think this will hurt Romney. In fact, I think it will help him. It doesn't disparage the "average American" (as you put it) - it disparages Obama's system that encourages people to be reliant on the government. The "average American" doesn't like relying on the government (I'd say most hate the concept), and this clip affirms Romney's stance against that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As he said today, "It's not elegantly stated", and it does make him sound elitist, but he's right. There is a large chunk of Americans that will vote blue no matter what (and, conversely, a large group of Americans that will vote red no matter what). He does need to appeal to the independents in order to win. There's no point in wasting time and money to try to swing votes from that 47% (which seems high, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt). That was the point of the comment.

 

I do think it hurts his campaign though, if only because of the largely negative press it's getting now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Nice polls. "CNBC Yahoo Finance internet poll" and a Gallop Poll that did not even ask that question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow, major, major gaffe for Mitt and his campaign. How does this happen? Seriously!!

 

Pretty telling how he views the average American.

 

The major gaffe isn't what Romney said, it is the fact that 47% of Obama's redistributed America don't pay taxes.

 

And yes the average American is lazy and feels entitled. We are falling further behind China by the second.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And yes the average American is lazy and feels entitled. We are falling further behind China by the second.

 

unemployment #s say otherwise. I think this is similar to the "1000 years of darkness" comment, taking a small sampling and making a general, dramatic statement out of it.

 

If we are falling further behind China, why support someone who hands them our jobs?

 

We are actually exporting products and not jobs under President Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

unemployment #s say otherwise. I think this is similar to the "1000 years of darkness" comment, taking a small sampling and making a general, dramatic statement out of it.

 

If we are falling further behind China, why support someone who hands them our jobs?

 

We are actually exporting products and not jobs under President Obama.

 

Well again... You are misinformed or blatantly lying. You are a drone- how can you allude that Romney handed jobs overseas? That is completely a lie and has been refuted many times. However president Obama continues to spew that out at his campaign speeches when it is false, and then drones like you keep repeating it.

 

 

Tell me... What policies has Obama proposed that will promote economic growth in his next term? Be specific, and this time maybe check your "facts"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The major gaffe isn't what Romney said, it is the fact that 47% of Obama's redistributed America don't pay taxes.

 

And yes the average American is lazy and feels entitled. We are falling further behind China by the second.

 

I would completely disagree with this. The average American doesn't like being on government handouts, but will take them if they are there. The main thing we need to do is encourage/force people to not be on the dole, rather than encouraging them to remain on it.

 

unemployment #s say otherwise. I think this is similar to the "1000 years of darkness" comment, taking a small sampling and making a general, dramatic statement out of it.

 

If we are falling further behind China, why support someone who hands them our jobs?

 

We are actually exporting products and not jobs under President Obama.

 

Err... I wouldn't point to the unemployment numbers to make your case here. Just because more people have given up looking for work (according to gov't definition), doesn't mean that more people are working.

 

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/OBMAUNEMPLOYMENTFAILCHARTSEPT.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Err... I wouldn't point to the unemployment numbers to make your case here. Just because more people have given up looking for work (according to gov't definition), doesn't mean that more people are working.

 

http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/OBMAUNEMPLOYMENTFAILCHARTSEPT.jpg

 

not sure I catch your drift...if people are giving up on finding work to live off the gov't, wouldn't unemployment rise? I mean if that is the supposed goal of our leftist society, why don't the #s match?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well again... You are misinformed or blatantly lying. You are a drone- how can you allude that Romney handed jobs overseas? That is completely a lie and has been refuted many times. However president Obama continues to spew that out at his campaign speeches when it is false, and then drones like you keep repeating it.

 

 

Tell me... What policies has Obama proposed that will promote economic growth in his next term? Be specific, and this time maybe check your "facts"

 

Drones?

 

ha, from someone who supports the guys that care not for fact checking.

 

What specifics have been offered by Mitt?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not sure I catch your drift...if people are giving up on finding work to live off the gov't, wouldn't unemployment rise? I mean if that is the supposed goal of our leftist society, why don't the #s match?

 

NO! You should really read how they calculate the the number before spouting off like that.

 

Roughly, they take the number of people looking for work and divide that by the total workforce. The trick that they do is to take people who are out of work for over 99 weeks and remove them from the number of people unemployed and also remove them from the workforce. Making this issue of long term unemployment just disappear.

 

This little trick actually reduces the unemployment rate by removing the same number from the numerator and denominator of that equation. Artificially decreasing the unemployment rate.

 

The plot CJdomer linked really does show the data well. The unemployment rate would be over 11% if the workforce was the same size as when the president took office. This is not new to this presidency, so dont get me wrong, it is a shameless trick though.

 

You should look up labor force participation rate if you want to find another stat that explains this more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would completely disagree with this. The average American doesn't like being on government handouts, but will take them if they are there. The main thing we need to do is encourage/force people to not be on the dole, rather than encouraging them to remain on it.

 

 

You are flat out wrong. The average American can sit at home for almost 2 years and earn as much or almost as much as they can by working. Where is the incentive? If unemployment and food stamps wer reduced back to 6 months (or less) there would be some incentive to look for a job. As it stands now there is no benefit to that. They sit on their ass for 1.5 years then start looking for a job.

 

Some facts about Obama's America:

 

•Real economic growth during the recovery – now three years old – has averaged 2.2%, less than half of the historic average for post recession rebounds.

•There are 1.1 million fewer people on non-farm payrolls today than when President Obama took office.

•The unemployment rate has been above 8% for 42 consecutive months, the longest period of sustained high unemployment since the Great Depression.

 

Even against Obama's own criteria the results of his Presidency scream failure:

 

•Passage of an $862 billion stimulus was promised to keep the unemployment rate from rising above 8%, compared to a projected 9% peak without the stimulus. Instead, the unemployment rate peaked at 10% in October 2008, and exceeded 9% for more than two years.

•Absent the stimulus, the unemployment rate was projected to fall below 7% during 2012. Yet, last month, it rose to 8.3%, in spite of 7.5 million people leaving the labor force, and therefore no longer being counted as unemployed.

•If the labor force participation rate had remained unchanged, the unemployment rate would now be above 11%.

•An increase of 18 million people, to 46 million Americans now receiving food stamps;

•A 122% increase in food stamp spending to an estimated $89 billion this year from $40 billion in 2008;

•An increase of 3.6 million people receiving Social Security disability payments;

•A 10 million person increase in the number of individuals receiving welfare, to 107 million, or more than one-third of the U.S. population;

• A 34%, $683 billion reduction in the adjusted gross income of the top 1% to $1.3 trillion in 2009 (latest data) from its 2007 peak.

 

He is the gift that keeps on giving. If he is elected again:

 

•Federal expenditures on ObamaCare will total $2.3 trillion, a $1.4 trillion increase from the program’s initial estimates;

•The combination of budget cuts and sequestration will reduce defense spending by $1 trillion, while total government spending will increase by $1.1 trillion;

•Taxes will be increased by $1.8 trillion

•Yet, the national debt will increase by another $11 trillion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are flat out wrong. The average American can sit at home for almost 2 years and earn as much or almost as much as they can by working. Where is the incentive? If unemployment and food stamps wer reduced back to 6 months (or less) there would be some incentive to look for a job. As it stands now there is no benefit to that. They sit on their ass for 1.5 years then start looking for a job.

 

Some facts about Obama's America:

 

•Real economic growth during the recovery – now three years old – has averaged 2.2%, less than half of the historic average for post recession rebounds.

•There are 1.1 million fewer people on non-farm payrolls today than when President Obama took office.

•The unemployment rate has been above 8% for 42 consecutive months, the longest period of sustained high unemployment since the Great Depression.

 

Even against Obama's own criteria the results of his Presidency scream failure:

 

•Passage of an $862 billion stimulus was promised to keep the unemployment rate from rising above 8%, compared to a projected 9% peak without the stimulus. Instead, the unemployment rate peaked at 10% in October 2008, and exceeded 9% for more than two years.

•Absent the stimulus, the unemployment rate was projected to fall below 7% during 2012. Yet, last month, it rose to 8.3%, in spite of 7.5 million people leaving the labor force, and therefore no longer being counted as unemployed.

•If the labor force participation rate had remained unchanged, the unemployment rate would now be above 11%.

•An increase of 18 million people, to 46 million Americans now receiving food stamps;

•A 122% increase in food stamp spending to an estimated $89 billion this year from $40 billion in 2008;

•An increase of 3.6 million people receiving Social Security disability payments;

•A 10 million person increase in the number of individuals receiving welfare, to 107 million, or more than one-third of the U.S. population;

• A 34%, $683 billion reduction in the adjusted gross income of the top 1% to $1.3 trillion in 2009 (latest data) from its 2007 peak.

 

He is the gift that keeps on giving. If he is elected again:

 

•Federal expenditures on ObamaCare will total $2.3 trillion, a $1.4 trillion increase from the program’s initial estimates;

•The combination of budget cuts and sequestration will reduce defense spending by $1 trillion, while total government spending will increase by $1.1 trillion;

•Taxes will be increased by $1.8 trillion

•Yet, the national debt will increase by another $11 trillion.

 

My statements and yours aren't contradictory (they are basically unrelated), so why do you say I'm flat out wrong? My comment had little to nothing to do with who the president is - it was about my impressions on the "average American". I said that the average American will take the handout if given, but not that they particularly proud of doing it. I never said anything about approving/disapproving of the concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...