So that's it for the election. - Page 50

Lucky · #1 10-23-2012, 01:33 AM

Their substantive policies are nearly identical. However Romney would definitely be the lesser of 2 evils at this point.

Lexical · #2 10-23-2012, 01:37 AM

Okay, so I hear a lot of conservatives talk about Mitt's plan. Heck, he event mentioned it during the debates saying it is on his website. I am currently there and I can't find it. I had hopes under the "full plan" key, but that just leads to a broken flash frame. All I know is that he wants to cut taxes and increase spending by several trillion dollars and all he can come up with to fund it all is cutting Obama care. The math doesn't add up and I am waiting for him to publish all his math like Obama has done. Until he does, I can not even consider his plan as a viable option. Can anyone link me Romney's math? Because I feel left out.

But on the debate, I felt both parties did well. I felt Obama was a little too aggressive and talked too much about the short comings of Romney's rather than his own plans which is his campaign strategy I hear (to undermine Romney). I felt Obama dodged the China question way too easily and we kept going back to the same bickering we have seen in every debate e.g. the automotive bailout. I did not like Romney's plan for Syria since giving oppositions guns is what got us al-Qaeda in the first place(there is something the Ron Paul supporters and I can agree on [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]). It honestly seems like they both have the same agenda, but Obama wants to approach it more tactfully and methodically and Romney wants to flex the American muscle. I worry about Iran getting a nuclear missile, but I honestly have full faith in Obama not to let that happen as he said "military involvement should be a last resort."

On the subject of Iran, has anyone heard of that conspiracy theory that Israel will start invasion of Iran to force Obama to back them? Any legitimacy or is it all just random ramblings on the Internet like I assume?

LizardNecro · #3 10-23-2012, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lexical [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Okay, so I hear a lot of conservatives talk about Mitt's plan. Heck, he event mentioned it during the debates saying it is on his website. I am currently there and I can't find it. I had hopes under the "full plan" key, but that just leads to a broken flash frame. All I know is that he wants to cut taxes and increase spending by several trillion dollars and all he can come up with to fund it all is cutting Obama care. The math doesn't add up and I am waiting for him to publish all his math like Obama has done. Until he does, I can not even consider his plan as a viable option. Can anyone link me Romney's math? Because I feel left out.

The "full plan" link works for me in IE (it's a frame with a scribd document of eight pagefs), but I don't see any specific cuts. The closest I see is on page 5:

Code:

Stop Runaway Federal Spending And Debt.
 
Reduce federal spending as a share of GDP to 20 percent – its pre-crisis average – by2016.

In so doing, reduce policy uncertainty over the need for future tax increases.

I haven't been able to find a specific list of what would actually be cut.

The scribd link is here:
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/102...8fht0g06taehfj

If I'm missing something, please let me know.

Orruar · #4 10-23-2012, 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardNecro [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Code:

Stop Runaway Federal Spending And Debt.
 
Reduce federal spending as a share of GDP to 20 percent – its pre-crisis average – by2016.

In so doing, reduce policy uncertainty over the need for future tax increases.

I haven't been able to find a specific list of what would actually be cut.

The scribd link is here:
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/102...8fht0g06taehfj

If I'm missing something, please let me know.

That's because he isn't going to cut anything. His grand plan is to grow the economy while keeping spending roughly the same, thus reducing the total cost of government relative to GDP. Basically the same bullshit all politicians say, since cutting a program means lost votes. The only reason I'd possibly vote for Romney is if I thought he was lying and he'd actually cut the hell out of spending once in office. But I don't believe this to be likely.

Lexical · #5 10-23-2012, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LizardNecro [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The "full plan" link works for me in IE (it's a frame with a scribd document of eight pagefs), but I don't see any specific cuts. The closest I see is on page 5:

Code:

Stop Runaway Federal Spending And Debt.
 
Reduce federal spending as a share of GDP to 20 percent – its pre-crisis average – by2016.

In so doing, reduce policy uncertainty over the need for future tax increases.

I haven't been able to find a specific list of what would actually be cut.

The scribd link is here:
http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/102...8fht0g06taehfj

If I'm missing something, please let me know.

The link worked for me! Thanks!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That's because he isn't going to cut anything. His grand plan is to grow the economy while keeping spending roughly the same, thus reducing the total cost of government relative to GDP. Basically the same bullshit all politicians say, since cutting a program means lost votes. The only reason I'd possibly vote for Romney is if I thought he was lying and he'd actually cut the hell out of spending once in office. But I don't believe this to be likely.

At first, I really didn't want to believe this, but I have looked over Paul Ryan's proposal as well as anything Romney could have possibly posted and I am afraid you are right. The stance is "Without Obamacare, the budget will balance itself!" Kind of silly really.

hatelore · #6 10-23-2012, 01:56 AM

What country do you live in has been?

Hasbinlulz · #7 10-23-2012, 04:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatelore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What country do you live in has been?

America, duh.

hatelore · #8 10-23-2012, 02:03 AM

Man, when you enter the conversation alarti its like.... Its kind of like when a 13 year old kid walks in on a group of adults talking and tries to fit in. Are you this immature in real life too?

Lexical · #9 10-23-2012, 04:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatelore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Man, when you enter the conversation alarti its like.... Its kind of like when a 13 year old kid walks in on a group of adults talking and tries to fit in. Are you this immature in real life too?

Hate to break it to you Hatelore, but it is kind of hard to do anything but mock you incessantly. If you want to be taken seriously, post sources, use logical reasoning, and not rely on random sensationalist news headlines as your credibility. It will go a long way [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Alarti0001 · #10 10-23-2012, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hatelore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Man, when you enter the conversation alarti its like.... Its kind of like when a 13 year old kid walks in on a group of adults talking and tries to fit in. Are you this immature in real life too?

Dude, you have no room to comment when you have a brain that leads you down conspiracy corners.

Reason is what separates us from other animals (and our awesome thumbs) and right now you are waiving your ability to reason.