Obama Likely To Win Another Presidential Term: Gallup Poll

[koheesti]

From what I've been told by some rednecks here in Issan the only impartial news service is Fox news. Unsure if this is 100% true however.

From what I've been told by some rednecks here in Issan the only impartial news service is Fox news. Unsure if this is 100% true however.

I hope that you are joking Angsta or being ironic. Saying that Fox News is a source of truth is like saying Pravda always told the truth or Hitler always told the truth. Fox News is one of the biggest bunch of liars on the entire planet and that's saying something as there are a whole bunch of liars around. Fox News are masters of the art of the Big Lie, tell it big and tell it often and there will always be some poor saps around who actually believe them. The fact that Fox News at present has the highest number of viewers of any US news channel just shows how many gullible people there are in the USA. Plenty of decent honourable Americans around but you won't find any of them regularly watching Fox News!

Spoken like someone who has never or only rarely watched it.

When I was on Samui I used to take part in a local pub quiz every week. One of our toughest competitors each week was a group of liberal ladies from the USA and Canada. They were a sharp bunch. One day, the picture round was "Famous People Named Sean (and its various spellings)". We switched answer sheets to check scores and I was shocked to see that they didn't recognize Sean Hannity of Fox News. I even asked afterwards and they didn't even recognize his name. ANY self-respecting North American liberal knows who their "enemy" is, and Sean Hannity is the most shameless right-wing talking head on TV.

Back to the topic, I'm sure Obama will win. Things are looking good for Romney in the polls, but just like the recent Supreme Court decision on Obamacare, conventional wisdom is often wrong. I think I'll move back to the USA just so I can leave the country after he wins his second term.

[samran]

And that somehow makes it OK to add another $6 trillion to it in just 4 years?

Bush added $5 trillion over 8 years AND includes funding two wars so you can see where a lot of the money went. At least after Bush it was roughly 80% of GDP. Now it is closer to 110% of GDP. But that's OK because the previous president raised it from about 40% to 80%. Will that also give the next president a perfectly good excuse to raise it from 110% to 150%? When the hell does it stop?

Where does it stop? Not with Romney.

I never said there is anything 'right' about debt levels. You can 'fact check' me if you want

What I find disingenuous is the convienient amnesia that comes about from GOP'ers on debt when it wasn't an issue for the GOP 4 or 8 years ago.

But I hardly think the GOP are going to be the party of reform on this one. Neither of them are.

[keemapoot]

Afterall, religion wise, the right of the GOP and the Taliban aren't too far apart when it comes to their social views.

Here's one religious-based view Americans can look forward to if Romney is elected. Ryan, Romney's V.P. was a co-sponsor with Claude Akin and others on the bill, HR 3, that tried to re-term "rape" to "forcible rape" in a bill about whether or not federal taxpayer money should go to pay for abortions for rape victims. This isn't ancient history either; this happened just last year in 2011.

Other recent Republican claims are that a woman's body can reject sperm of a rapist somehow and that if rape happens God intended it to, and other such non Taliban-like pronouncements.

Taliban indeed.

[jayboy]

I am a Brit (English) and hope that Labour (equivalent of the Democrats) triumph in 3 or so years time when its our turn, so some sensibility will be retained in your country and will return to mine!!

This post shows a very common though completely incorrect understanding among some British people about American political parties.

The Democrats certainly contain a small fringe that could be accomodated in the British Labour Party but the main stream US Democrats are as near as makes no difference to David Cameron's style of conservatism.It's an open secret that Cameron and Obama get on extremely well not only personally but on most policy grounds (okay not so much on fiscal stimulus).Within the Democrats there are many in Congress who are far to the right of most British conservatives.Frankly it's very difficult to equate British parties to American ones, though tempting because of cultural affinity between the two countries, because the political traditions are so very different.If I can generalise - always dangerous - Americans are far more sceptical of the state and more self reliant, and their political parties reflect this.At the same time communal activity and neighbourly support is far more impressive in the US than in the UK.

You are always going to get different factions in all political parties (unless it is a dictatorial or communist state) across the broad spectrum of policies. However, I maintain that the Labour party in the UK is, and always has been more akin to the Democrats and Republicans to the Tories.

I would argue your point about community spirit and neighbourly support being "far more impressive in the US than the UK" - you obviously haven't been to a traditional village in England or witnessed 'the Dunkirk spirit' during the second world war!!!

It was our defiance of Hitler and determination to overcome the 'evil' of the nazi regime that won the day!!!

It's not a question of different factions in all political parties - of course there are.Your error was to believe that the Republicans somehow equate with the British Conservatives and the Democrats with British Labour.You now say "more akin" which I think is arguable but still needs clarification and comes with several caveats.The fact remains that most leading British conservatives, certainly David Cameron and most of his cabinet, could very happily exist in the American Democrat Party.What you suggest was I think more applicable half a century ago.

You misunderstand my point about communal spirit.I think anyone who has lived both in the US and the UK knows exactly what I mean.

By the way British defiance of the Nazis was admirable but it did not "win the day".The Red Army did that.

[Jingthing]

Afterall, religion wise, the right of the GOP and the Taliban aren't too far apart when it comes to their social views.

Here's one religious-based view Americans can look forward to if Romney is elected. Ryan, Romney's V.P. was a co-sponsor with Claude Akin and others on the bill, HR 3, that tried to re-term "rape" to "forcible rape" in a bill about whether or not federal taxpayer money should go to pay for abortions for rape victims. This isn't ancient history either; this happened just last year in 2011.

Other recent Republican claims are that a woman's body can reject sperm of a rapist somehow and that if rape happens God intended it to, and other such non Taliban-like pronouncements.

Taliban indeed.

There really are a lot of similar world views between American right wing Christian fundamentalists and traditional Islamic fundamentalists. Don't believe that? Take the test and I think you'll get the point:

http://www.slate.com..._christian.html

This issue is indeed a major difference in ideologies of the two great American political parties. The republicans harbor and coddle these Christian social extremists while the democrats oppose the idea of IMPOSING religious extremism on the entire population. Romney and Ryan are for overturning Roe vs. Wade, for extremely (or total in Ryan's case) restricted abortion legality, and for an anti-gay constitutional amendment.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Jingthing

[uptheos]

When the hell does it stop?

Re Debt......I quite like this:

"I haven’t heard too many people address this issue in the media and therefore I’m not really sure if it’s actually an issue to be wrestled with. I think most “experts” would say “of course America can dig itself out of its hole. It’s America. If worse comes to worse, we can just inflate our way out of our debt, or we can just say the political equivalent of “<deleted> you, we’re not paying, just try and sue me”. Maybe this is ultimately the answer. That America really has nothing to worry about because in the end we can just declare bankruptcy and who can stop us? But this makes me wonder, who would we be declaring bankruptcy against? Who actually owns America’s debt?"

[koheesti]

What I find disingenuous is the convienient amnesia that comes about from GOP'ers on debt when it wasn't an issue for the GOP 4 or 8 years ago.

I'm Republican and I remember when the Republicans lost control of Congress in the mid-term 2006 elections (btw - which means the Dems were in control for the two years before the collapse). When they lost, I said, "Good. They've been spending way too much. Maybe this loss will remind them that they are supposed to be the party against wild spending". Have they learned, really? Or are they just pretending now that they are in the minority? I'm afraid that once they get in the majority they will start their spending habits again. But that's just what I think might happen. All of us already KNOW what the Democrats have done and will continue to do - spend, spend, spend - and pay for it with $90 billion in additional taxes on the rich. Woo-hoo.

Edited November 1, 2012 by koheesti

[GentlemanJim]

Yes, the storm crisis points out that BIG GOVERNMENT isn't so bad after all. This is a major ideological divide between the two parties.

George W. Bush gutted FEMA, unwisely placed it under Homeland Security, made a crony incompetent man it's head (the infamous "Brownie") and performed horribly poorly during Katrina.

Both Clinton and Obama reinforced FEMA and Obama is indeed performing masterfully during this current historically severe storm crisis and aftermath.

While it is true that Obama has supported a modest 3 percent cut in FEMA, Romney/Ryan budget has supported 40 percent severe cuts, sending the functions back to the states as block grants. That is totally irrational and dangerous. Only the FEDERAL government can efficiently be ready for major disasters happening any time, anywhere. There is no way that each state can do that, except maybe a few super big states, especially with a slashed federal budget, and or course they would have to raise states taxes anyway.

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL and more and more are realizing the sad reality that these kinds of major climate related natural disasters ARE happening more frequently so are very likely to CONTINUE to occur more frequently. So big government like FEMA is more important than ever.

Historically with the Gallup poll, when such a commanding majority THINKS a particular side will win ... they win.

This is a good post until you get to the bit about

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL

It is not real Jingthing, honest! It is a global climatic cycle, and we just happen to be here in the blinking of a geological eye that it is happening. On top of that some quite wicked people calculated that by whipping the population up into a AGW frenzy, there were many Billions to be made in the ridiculous carbon tax system which is in place as we speak/type. If you want to know why the climate is going all whacky, look to precession of the planet and that really really big yellow hot thing up in the sky. The answers lie there, but sadly there is not as much cash in the real problem being known.

I hope Obama does get back in. It will give him the chance to finish what he started when he was handed the crock of sh*t from the last lot, and he will be judged on the outcome in 4 years. What Romney proposes simply does not make any economic sense. And before anyone pipes up that it's non of my business, yes it is. The US fiscal policy happens to affect the amount of money in my pocket, so all I can hope for is that US voters get out there and vote responsibly.

[Jingthing]

On man made climate change being for REAL, even though I myself am not a scientist, I think I'll put my trust in the overwhelmingly majority of global scientists (who actually know something about the field, not just people with unrelated Bachelor degrees of science that the climate skeptics use for their devious propaganda) over some random poster on an anonymous internet forum. Okie Dokie?

Interestingly, Romney also accepted mainstream science on this, until he didn't. (When the politics favored his changed Romnesian position.)

The republican party in general is radically anti-science. I find that very scary. Even on things like evolution. It's really bizarre actually, something out of the dark ages.

While I'm sad that Obama hasn't actually done much at all about the climate change issue, I'm more comfortable with a leader and a party that isn't anti-science in general.

Edited November 1, 2012 by Jingthing

[Basil B]

From what I've been told by some rednecks here in Issan the only impartial news service is Fox news. Unsure if this is 100% true however.

Fox News = Merdoch, I need say no more.

[SICHONSTEVE]

Yes, the storm crisis points out that BIG GOVERNMENT isn't so bad after all. This is a major ideological divide between the two parties.

George W. Bush gutted FEMA, unwisely placed it under Homeland Security, made a crony incompetent man it's head (the infamous "Brownie") and performed horribly poorly during Katrina.

Both Clinton and Obama reinforced FEMA and Obama is indeed performing masterfully during this current historically severe storm crisis and aftermath.

While it is true that Obama has supported a modest 3 percent cut in FEMA, Romney/Ryan budget has supported 40 percent severe cuts, sending the functions back to the states as block grants. That is totally irrational and dangerous. Only the FEDERAL government can efficiently be ready for major disasters happening any time, anywhere. There is no way that each state can do that, except maybe a few super big states, especially with a slashed federal budget, and or course they would have to raise states taxes anyway.

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL and more and more are realizing the sad reality that these kinds of major climate related natural disasters ARE happening more frequently so are very likely to CONTINUE to occur more frequently. So big government like FEMA is more important than ever.

Historically with the Gallup poll, when such a commanding majority THINKS a particular side will win ... they win.

This is a good post until you get to the bit about

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL

It is not real Jingthing, honest! It is a global climatic cycle, and we just happen to be here in the blinking of a geological eye that it is happening. On top of that some quite wicked people calculated that by whipping the population up into a AGW frenzy, there were many Billions to be made in the ridiculous carbon tax system which is in place as we speak/type. If you want to know why the climate is going all whacky, look to precession of the planet and that really really big yellow hot thing up in the sky. The answers lie there, but sadly there is not as much cash in the real problem being known.

I hope Obama does get back in. It will give him the chance to finish what he started when he was handed the crock of sh*t from the last lot, and he will be judged on the outcome in 4 years. What Romney proposes simply does not make any economic sense. And before anyone pipes up that it's non of my business, yes it is. The US fiscal policy happens to affect the amount of money in my pocket, so all I can hope for is that US voters get out there and vote responsibly.

"It is not real Jingthing, honest! It is a global climatic cycle, and we just happen to be here in the blinking of a geological eye that it is happening".

The most laughable statement I've seen all year - talking about being ignorant of the facts and overwhelming evidence indicating the opposite!!

Have you seen Al Gore's brilliant 'roadshow' destroying your beliefs and creating such a convincing case of what is really happening to our planet???

However, having disagreed so vehemently with your take on global warming, my sentiments on who deserves to win the election are the same as yours so you clearly do have a modicum of reason, in my eyes, on certain subjects.

[robokop]

From what I've been told by some rednecks here in Issan the only impartial news service is Fox news. Unsure if this is 100% true however.

It seems kind of odd that Liberals are now talking fondly of Fox. Did it take the Democrats/Liberal Rednecks this long to form a positive opinion about Fox?

Or maybe the writer is all mixed up name calling a certain group of Americans, "Rednecks" Maybe writer does not know the history of Rednecks, aka Democrats. Just a brief reminder of what a Redneck is and where the term came from to name a certain group of people.

The term characterized farmers having a red neck caused by sunburn from hours working in the fields. A citation from 1893 provides a definition as "poorer inhabitants of the rural districts...men who work in the field, as a matter of course, generally have their skin stained red and burnt by the sun, and especially is this true of the back of their necks".

By 1900, "rednecks" was in common use to designate the political factions inside the Democratic Party comprising poor white farmers in the South. The same group was also often called the "wool hat boys" (for they opposed the rich men, who wore expensive silk hats). A newspaper notice in Mississippi in August 1891 called on rednecks to rally at the polls at the upcoming primary election:

Primary on the 25th.

And the "rednecks" will be there.

And the "Yaller-heels" will be there, also.

And the "hayseeds" and "gray dillers," they'll be there, too.

And the "subordinates" and "subalterns" will be there to rebuke their slanderers and traducers.

By 1910, the political supporters of the Mississippi Democratic Party politician James K. Vardaman—chiefly poor white farmers—began to describe themselves proudly as "rednecks," even to the point of wearing red neckerchiefs to political rallies and picnics.

So based on historical source of term Redneck, writer is talking about Democrats, who now he says favors Fox News

[samran]

From what I've been told by some rednecks here in Issan the only impartial news service is Fox news. Unsure if this is 100% true however.

It seems kind of odd that Liberals are now talking fondly of Fox. Did it take the Democrats/Liberal Rednecks this long to form a positive opinion about Fox?

I think you might need to check if your sarcasm recognition chip is working properly.

[GentlemanJim]

Yes, the storm crisis points out that BIG GOVERNMENT isn't so bad after all. This is a major ideological divide between the two parties.

George W. Bush gutted FEMA, unwisely placed it under Homeland Security, made a crony incompetent man it's head (the infamous "Brownie") and performed horribly poorly during Katrina.

Both Clinton and Obama reinforced FEMA and Obama is indeed performing masterfully during this current historically severe storm crisis and aftermath.

While it is true that Obama has supported a modest 3 percent cut in FEMA, Romney/Ryan budget has supported 40 percent severe cuts, sending the functions back to the states as block grants. That is totally irrational and dangerous. Only the FEDERAL government can efficiently be ready for major disasters happening any time, anywhere. There is no way that each state can do that, except maybe a few super big states, especially with a slashed federal budget, and or course they would have to raise states taxes anyway.

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL and more and more are realizing the sad reality that these kinds of major climate related natural disasters ARE happening more frequently so are very likely to CONTINUE to occur more frequently. So big government like FEMA is more important than ever.

Historically with the Gallup poll, when such a commanding majority THINKS a particular side will win ... they win.

This is a good post until you get to the bit about

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL

It is not real Jingthing, honest! It is a global climatic cycle, and we just happen to be here in the blinking of a geological eye that it is happening. On top of that some quite wicked people calculated that by whipping the population up into a AGW frenzy, there were many Billions to be made in the ridiculous carbon tax system which is in place as we speak/type. If you want to know why the climate is going all whacky, look to precession of the planet and that really really big yellow hot thing up in the sky. The answers lie there, but sadly there is not as much cash in the real problem being known.

I hope Obama does get back in. It will give him the chance to finish what he started when he was handed the crock of sh*t from the last lot, and he will be judged on the outcome in 4 years. What Romney proposes simply does not make any economic sense. And before anyone pipes up that it's non of my business, yes it is. The US fiscal policy happens to affect the amount of money in my pocket, so all I can hope for is that US voters get out there and vote responsibly.

"It is not real Jingthing, honest! It is a global climatic cycle, and we just happen to be here in the blinking of a geological eye that it is happening".

The most laughable statement I've seen all year - talking about being ignorant of the facts and overwhelming evidence indicating the opposite!!

Have you seen Al Gore's brilliant 'roadshow' destroying your beliefs and creating such a convincing case of what is really happening to our planet???

However, having disagreed so vehemently with your take on global warming, my sentiments on who deserves to win the election are the same as yours so you clearly do have a modicum of reason, in my eyes, on certain subjects.

Al Gore, co-owns the investment group that started the carbon credit system. he has since made billions from what is nothing more than a scam. his roadshow is a glittzy presentation of the worst abuse of data and statistics I have ever seen, and it is aimed at the countless millions of people just like you! Hook line and sinker without any capacity for independent rational verification of information. Al Gore is a conman of the first order. Would you like me to fish out links so that you can see for yourself, or are you ok with using a search engine?

How gracious of you to say that I have a modicum of reason in your eyes, because I agree with you on a 50/50 choice. When you start using that search engine to find out what a scam artist Gore is, then also look up the word 'patronizing'! That Gore is a scam artist is a very inconvenient truth!

Edited November 1, 2012 by GentlemanJim

[chuckd]

Guess this is the end of America if he gets relected. Sort of sad really..... The US national debt when Obama took office was 10.626 trillion dollars. The current national debt is 15.566 trillion dollars. ......

So he is either an extremely generous man with the money we borrow from China, or he has a secret agenda to financially destroy America and enslave our children forever in debt.

Remind again me who got it to $10.6bn? Whathisname....And didn't that happen in so called 'good times'?

The first 43 Presidents before this one.

[samran]

What I find disingenuous is the convienient amnesia that comes about from GOP'ers on debt when it wasn't an issue for the GOP 4 or 8 years ago.

I'm Republican and I remember when the Republicans lost control of Congress in the mid-term 2006 elections (btw - which means the Dems were in control for the two years before the collapse). When they lost, I said, "Good. They've been spending way too much. Maybe this loss will remind them that they are supposed to be the party against wild spending". Have they learned, really? Or are they just pretending now that they are in the minority? I'm afraid that once they get in the majority they will start their spending habits again. But that's just what I think might happen. All of us already KNOW what the Democrats have done and will continue to do - spend, spend, spend - and pay for it with $90 billion in additional taxes on the rich. Woo-hoo.

Two seperate philosophies here as far as I can see.

Dems: Pump priming the economy. Keep going until it starts. Varying views on the size of government. In the meantime, try and close the gap between outgoings and tax receipts.

GOP: Simply don't believe in government. Best way to get rid of this is to create a structural deficit. Taxes ALWAYS less than outgoings. Eventually the whole facade will collapse in on itself. Voila - smaller government.

Neither party will allow each other to do what they want - so we have the situation you have now.

The honest answer? For me you are going to have to raise tax some for a bunch of people. Apply a consumtion based VAT/GST nation wide.

And massive cuts. Get rid of agricultural subsidies, get rid of SS benefits for anyone entering the workforce NOW (replaced with portable private pensions).

But that is just me. Neither side has the guts to do what is needed, so things will continue on.

Edited November 1, 2012 by samran

[samran]

Guess this is the end of America if he gets relected. Sort of sad really..... The US national debt when Obama took office was 10.626 trillion dollars. The current national debt is 15.566 trillion dollars. ......

So he is either an extremely generous man with the money we borrow from China, or he has a secret agenda to financially destroy America and enslave our children forever in debt.

Remind again me who got it to $10.6bn? Whathisname....And didn't that happen in so called 'good times'?

The first 43 Presidents before this one.

To paraphrase Adams "America lives!"

[keemapoot]

Romney has been the butt of countless jokes on late night television. A new study has shown jokes about Romney outnumber jokes about Obama by a margin of more than 2 to 1. Some of the jokes illustrate the common sometimes accurate, sometimes stereotypical public perceptions about the man:

“Hookers in Times Square, God bless ’em, are offering a Mitt Romney Special. For an extra $20 they’ll change positions.”

“They say that Paul Ryan will humanize Romney. And I thought, hell, an amoeba could humanize Romney.”

“Mitt Romney is worth half a billion dollars and he’s saying he pays 13 percent annually in taxes. Al Capone paid more than 13 percent in taxes, ladies and gentlemen.”

“Mitt Romney looks like a guy modeling briefs on a package of underwear,” he joked recently on CBS’s Late Show with David Letterman. “He looks like a guy who goes to the restroom when the check comes...He looks like a guy who would run a seminar on condo flipping … He looks like that guy on the golf course in the Levitra commercial.”

And it goes on and on. The point about all this is that Romney never did connect with people, and that may be one reason that will cost him this election.

http://www.thedailyb...bout-obama.html

[lomatopo]

Many people point to Romney's one term governorship in Massachusetts as evidence of his worth.

And we can point to Obama's one term as evidence of his worth - or lack of it to be precise.

We didn't miss him.

As Massachusetts Governor, Romney Was Often Away

By DANNY HAKIM

Published: October 13, 2012

BOSTON — When the ceiling collapsed in the Big Dig tunnel here, Gov. Mitt Romney was at his vacation home in New Hampshire. When the Bush administration warned that the nation was at high risk of a terror attack in December 2003, he was at his Utah retreat. And for much of the time the legislature was negotiating changes to his landmark health care bill, he was on the road.

During Mr. Romney’s four-year term as governor of Massachusetts, he cumulatively spent more than a year — part or all of 417 days — out of the state, according to a review of his schedule and other records. More than 70 percent of that time was spent on personal or political trips unrelated to his job, a New York Times analysis found.

Mr. Romney, now the Republican presidential nominee, took lengthy vacations and weekend getaways. But much of his travel was to lay the groundwork for the presidential ambitions he would pursue in the 2008 election, two years after leaving office.

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

538 shows some recent divergence: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

Edited November 1, 2012 by lomatopo

[mania]

Just wanted to subscribe to this new thread so it shows up in my content.

But would also say I am a bit surprised by how vehemently some known to be Non-Americans

due to their previous posts are defending a candidate.

It in many ways makes me think of how some expats defend the Yellow or Red parties here.

But at least in those cases the expat lives in Thailand. Yet I do not think the excited non-American posters

on this thread & the others live in the US. So they will not really be subjected to any result.

I know some will say it is because when the US President farts the world smells it but really between these two

the world will be affected about the same IMHO

But the people who have to live under the rule of the US government after this election no matter where they live in the world

I can see why they are excited. The non-Americans not so much.

God knows I as an American could care less who rules in other countries.

Anyway interesting reading & I guess all will be revealed in a few days.

[robokop]

Yes, the storm crisis points out that BIG GOVERNMENT isn't so bad after all. This is a major ideological divide between the two parties.

George W. Bush gutted FEMA, unwisely placed it under Homeland Security, made a crony incompetent man it's head (the infamous "Brownie") and performed horribly poorly during Katrina.

Both Clinton and Obama reinforced FEMA and Obama is indeed performing masterfully during this current historically severe storm crisis and aftermath.

While it is true that Obama has supported a modest 3 percent cut in FEMA, Romney/Ryan budget has supported 40 percent severe cuts, sending the functions back to the states as block grants. That is totally irrational and dangerous. Only the FEDERAL government can efficiently be ready for major disasters happening any time, anywhere. There is no way that each state can do that, except maybe a few super big states, especially with a slashed federal budget, and or course they would have to raise states taxes anyway.

Americans now realize that man made global climate change is REAL and more and more are realizing the sad reality that these kinds of major climate related natural disasters ARE happening more frequently so are very likely to CONTINUE to occur more frequently. So big government like FEMA is more important than ever.

Historically with the Gallup poll, when such a commanding majority THINKS a particular side will win ... they win.

I was just wondering just exactly is Obama doing so masterfully with this severe storm? Did he hold back the flood waters? Did he put out the fires in NYC? Was it Obama who rescued people trapped on rooftops or was that the best PD in the world, the NYPD?

You seem to know Obama cut FEMA 3%, how much did Bush cut FEMA that gutted FEMA? Isn't Obama in the process of "Gutting the US Military" with far more reaching bad results of such cuts?

Because "you" believe Man made global warming is real, does not mean majority of Americans believe it nor does it make it a true statement. I believe this storm has nothing to do with "Global Warming" and for sure the scientific community has not made the determination, certainly not in one day. Your belief is merely your belief in what you want to believe.

How did the USA ever survive without FEMA? USA at one time had a great educational system till the Dept of Education got more and more involved, now the US educational systems lags way behing other developed nations. I think same holds true with FEMA, it is more of a problem than a solution.

Could you please review the great job Obama did on the disaster oil spill, the 7 day delayed response, and how FEMA was so unprepared for that disaster. How is the Gulf region recovering?

[koheesti]

What I find disingenuous is the convienient amnesia that comes about from GOP'ers on debt when it wasn't an issue for the GOP 4 or 8 years ago.

I'm Republican and I remember when the Republicans lost control of Congress in the mid-term 2006 elections (btw - which means the Dems were in control for the two years before the collapse). When they lost, I said, "Good. They've been spending way too much. Maybe this loss will remind them that they are supposed to be the party against wild spending". Have they learned, really? Or are they just pretending now that they are in the minority? I'm afraid that once they get in the majority they will start their spending habits again. But that's just what I think might happen. All of us already KNOW what the Democrats have done and will continue to do - spend, spend, spend - and pay for it with $90 billion in additional taxes on the rich. Woo-hoo.

Two seperate philisophies here as far as I can see.

Dems: Pump priming the economy. Keep going until it starts. Varying views on the size of government. In the meantime, try and close the gap between outgoings and tax receipts.

The stimulus pumped nearly $900,000,000,000 into the economy. Where are the jobs - including the "shovel ready" ones? Why is GDP tanking from it's 2010 3.5% levels? Where are the great infrastructure projects like the Hoover Dam (which Obama himself used as an example)?

[robokop]

Speaking of polls. Here's two amusing ones, from the states that know them best:

Illinois: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Obama 57, Romney 41 Obama +16

Massachusetts: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 59, Romney 40 Obama +19

If Romney was such a hot Guv of Mass, why do they hate him now?

He is a cute one for you to answer

Gallups latest poll, Oct 28/29 of likely voters have Romney

ELECTION 2012 TRACKING

<div class="noscript"><em>Javascript required to view full data.</em></div>LIKELY VOTERS

CHANGE

Romney

51%

+1

Obama

46%

The poll shown in this story is an opinion poll, not a poll done of registered voters and voters most likely to vote. PS it also shows Romney increasing his lead. But it all means nothing except those who like to hear themselves talk. Come day after the election, we will see the real results.

[chuckd]

All of us already KNOW what the Democrats have done and will continue to do - spend, spend, spend - and pay for it with $90 billion in additional taxes on the rich. Woo-hoo.

And the Obama "tax the rich" scheme will fund the federal government for 8.8 days.

Makes one wonder what he plans to do after that.

[SICHONSTEVE]

A 50/50 choice!!! surely you mean the Democrats are a 100% choice of yours.

The statistics, tables, diagrams, and words he used seem pretty convincing to me. Allied to this, is the verdict (as adjudged by the science) of main-stream scientific bodies in the field, pointing decidedly to an OVERWHELMING argument for global warming being a real threat to our very existence.

Whether Gore has made a zillion dollars out of what he is doing is besides the point. The main thing is that he is educating the world as to the folly of not doing anything about it endangering mother earth.

If you want to now the real reason behind these Republican lobbyists supporting the view that we are all ignorant about the facts and making it all up - do you not just think that some of their oil chums might have 'dished the dosh' in attempting to 'trash' the science in order to protect their interests (as witnessed in the Reagan and 2 x bush eras).

Also, do you not wonder why there have been such weather extremes recently in literally every country in the world from droughts to floods to floods followed soon after by droughts (as in Thailand last year).

By the way, I didn't realise that the weather cycles run in months and years as I thought they happened over thousands or millions of years - I suppose if we are really unlucky then another ice age might start tomorrow in Florida such is the strange happenings going on today with the weather!!!

I looked up patroni(S)ing by the way and cannot see what the bar I choose to frequent has to do with the topic.

[robokop]

Guess this is the end of America if he gets relected. Sort of sad really..... The US national debt when Obama took office was 10.626 trillion dollars. The current national debt is 15.566 trillion dollars. ......

So he is either an extremely generous man with the money we borrow from China, or he has a secret agenda to financially destroy America and enslave our children forever in debt.

Remind again me who got it to $10.6bn? Whathisname....And didn't that happen in so called 'good times'?

Great idea, remind us just who did get the USA to a debt of 10.6Trillion. Could it be since the USA became a country? Obama added 15 Trillion in just 4 years. Are you saying that is good? I personally think it rots.

[robokop]

Many people point to Romney's one term governorship in Massachusetts as evidence of his worth.

And we can point to Obama's one term as evidence of his worth - or lack of it to be precise.

We didn't miss him.

As Massachusetts Governor, Romney Was Often Away

By DANNY HAKIM

Published: October 13, 2012

BOSTON — When the ceiling collapsed in the Big Dig tunnel here, Gov. Mitt Romney was at his vacation home in New Hampshire. When the Bush administration warned that the nation was at high risk of a terror attack in December 2003, he was at his Utah retreat. And for much of the time the legislature was negotiating changes to his landmark health care bill, he was on the road.

During Mr. Romney’s four-year term as governor of Massachusetts, he cumulatively spent more than a year — part or all of 417 days — out of the state, according to a review of his schedule and other records. More than 70 percent of that time was spent on personal or political trips unrelated to his job, a New York Times analysis found.

Mr. Romney, now the Republican presidential nominee, took lengthy vacations and weekend getaways. But much of his travel was to lay the groundwork for the presidential ambitions he would pursue in the 2008 election, two years after leaving office.

http://www.nytimes.c...wanted=all&_r=0

538 shows some recent divergence: http://fivethirtyeig...gs.nytimes.com/

Gee you forgot to mention Romney had nothing to do with the building of the "Big Dig". It was all Democrat Politicians that built that disaster that "Caved In", correct. And how much over the original budget did the spending go? How long did the "Big Dig" take to be constructed and how long was it first said it would take to build? A Democrat disaster, and the best you got is where Romney was when the cave in happened?

[mania]

And the Obama "tax the rich" scheme will fund the federal government for 8.8 days.

Makes one wonder what he plans to do after that.

This always amazes me when used as a major point of contention by the dem's as to why the deficit is so large.

Same with how increasing the tax on the rich or reducing tax breaks/incentives is going to so much as nick

the debt. Would be amusing if it was not so ignorant.

I am not saying all tax breaks are justified but I am saying I am amazed at how much more weight it is given than

what the reality of it is.

Do people really believe this is a cure? It is at best a very tiny band-aide if that.

I am surprised the average voter has swallowed this hook,line & sinker.

[Orac]

Guess this is the end of America if he gets relected. Sort of sad really..... The US national debt when Obama took office was 10.626 trillion dollars. The current national debt is 15.566 trillion dollars. ......

So he is either an extremely generous man with the money we borrow from China, or he has a secret agenda to financially destroy America and enslave our children forever in debt.

Remind again me who got it to $10.6bn? Whathisname....And didn't that happen in so called 'good times'?

Great idea, remind us just who did get the USA to a debt of 10.6Trillion. Could it be since the USA became a country? Obama added 15 Trillion in just 4 years. Are you saying that is good? I personally think it rots.

If you think Obama added 15 trillion to the debt then no wonder you appear to support Romney - his figures don't seem to add up either.

[robokop]

Speaking of polls. Here's two amusing ones, from the states that know them best:

Illinois: Romney vs. Obama WeAskAmerica Obama 57, Romney 41 Obama +16

Massachusetts: Romney vs. Obama Rasmussen Reports Obama 59, Romney 40 Obama +19

If Romney was such a hot Guv of Mass, why do they hate him now?

It took me a few minutes to stop laughing at what was said and what was not said in this post. Romney did get elected in a State with the Democrats holding a large majority of registered voters over the GOP. Then the very funny post, Obama 57, Romney 41 and the writer thinks this is a knock against Romney and shows what the voters in Mass think. Well I think that is pretty good for Romney and a kick in the butt for Obama. The GOP only has 11% of the registered voters in the entire State of Mass, yet Romney is pulling in 41%.

Post another joke for me-I love these I will tell you my version and not tell all the facts. Just as the original article means little. The real Gallup poll, based on a proven method of polling, has Romney ahead 51% to 45% for Obama-Oct 28 daily tracking poll Gallup. This article is based on an opinion poll of people who think who will win.

Gallup has been right on picking every President except one based on their polling of registered voters and voters likely to vote. Romney up by 6% now. Start crowing like a rooster after the election, it is really to close to call by either side, except by those who want to push their parties choice. Have a beer and have some fun. PS Obamacare will not cover you in Thailand just the way Medicare does not cover you. Pay all your life and not covered by Medicare because you live in Thailand where medical costs are cheaper