Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Barack Obama will win the 2012 electionFollow

#252varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 8:15 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Joph,
#253 Apr 01 2011 at 8:17 AM Rating: Excellent
The more you alienate the moderates the smaller your base grows
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#254 Apr 01 2011 at 8:28 AM Rating: Good
******
30,646 posts
gbaji wrote:
Except that the bill that they passed in the House contains the $61B in cuts that the Dems in the Senate are getting upset about. What internal process occurred among the GOP to arrive at that number is kinda unimportant, isn't it?


Not if you want to pretend they were compromising with the Dems in order to get to that $61B from $100B.

I mean, it was your argument that started the whole thing, after all...
#255 Apr 01 2011 at 9:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
It's not the fringe if we're the majority.

The Tea Party is not the majority by any measure: caucus size, popularity, whatever. They're just very loud and very good at running over the rest of their party.

Quote:
the Dems having 23 seats up and the GOP only 9 we're looking at a major shift.

Only a handful of those are considered competitive. There won't be any "major shift" regardless since the GOP will still control the House. At worst (from your perspective), the Democrats retain control of the Senate. At best, the Democrats filibuster every single bill that comes through and forces the GOP to collect 60 votes which they won't have. And Gbaji will cry about how unfair it is now that the Democrats are filibustering.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#256varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 9:39 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#257 Apr 01 2011 at 9:46 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
Actually at the best nothing gets done the price of gas continues to rise and Obama loses the presidency next year and the GOP then controls all 3 branches.

No, I meant the best realistic option.
Quote:
And you're insane if you don't think the GOP can pick up 10 seats from the Dems.

Might want to double check your math there.

Edited, Apr 1st 2011 10:47am by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#258varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 9:49 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#259 Apr 01 2011 at 10:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
I expect you to honour our 50$ bet.

Oh, don't worry about that. I have no problem asking for money :)
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#260 Apr 01 2011 at 1:18 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Speak Boehner continued paving the way towards accepting the $33B compromise today, explaining at a press conference that it would cost more to shut down the government than to keep it running.

This was not a message being delivered to Democrats and independents. This was a straight justification to the Tea Party and apology for delivering half of what they demanded. Meanwhile Republicans in the Senate are getting upset at the Tea Party hold-outs, saying that they're hurting the GOP position for the debate on entitlement reform and the debt cap; that the public will be burnt out and impatient with them before they get to the fights that actually matter.

But you and Gbaji just keep on saying that the GOP isn't worried and it's the Democrats who are scared of how poorly they'll be viewed.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#261varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 1:45 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Jophed,
#262 Apr 01 2011 at 1:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Except that people didn't vote for the GOP to do nothing. They want action and when that doesn't happen they won't be happy.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#263 Apr 01 2011 at 1:53 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
varusword75 wrote:
partisan article

lulz
Quote:
Sorry Mr. Bolton

The singer or the walrus faced failed diplomat?
Quote:
but wanting to cut less than 1% of the budget isn't exactly "die-hard" anything.

If you're doing the math against the entire budget, someone needs to explain the concept of "discretionary spending" to you. Someone besides me though.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#264varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 1:54 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Xarus,
#265 Apr 01 2011 at 1:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Annoying Ass
ZAM Administrator
Avatar
*****
12,049 posts
varusword75 wrote:


I can tell you the citizens of TN won't be happy with Alexander for this and people like me will spend money on whoever his tea party rival will be when he comes up for election.

Matter of fact i'm sending him a scathing e-mail right after this post.


I must say, I'm actually happy that Varus is taking this action. Good for him for sticking up for what he believes in, and trolling actual people who affect these decisions instead of trolling just us forum-goers.
____________________________
Retired News Writer for the ZAM Network
WoW - Aureliano the Insane - level 90 Druid on Sen'Jin
Nanaoki - level 90 Mage on Sen'Jin
#266 Apr 01 2011 at 1:58 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,374 posts
LockeColeMA wrote:
varusword75 wrote:


I can tell you the citizens of TN won't be happy with Alexander for this and people like me will spend money on whoever his tea party rival will be when he comes up for election.

Matter of fact i'm sending him a scathing e-mail right after this post.


I must say, I'm actually happy that Varus is taking this action. Good for him for sticking up for what he believes in, and trolling actual people who affect these decisions instead of trolling just us forum-goers.
I hope he remembers not to use his spell check, otherwise the Senator won't believe he's from his district/constituency/whateveryoucallit.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#267varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 2:03 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Locked,
#268varusword75, Posted: Apr 01 2011 at 2:04 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Ugly,
#269 Apr 01 2011 at 2:42 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Except that the bill that they passed in the House contains the $61B in cuts that the Dems in the Senate are getting upset about. What internal process occurred among the GOP to arrive at that number is kinda unimportant, isn't it?


Not if you want to pretend they were compromising with the Dems in order to get to that $61B from $100B.

I mean, it was your argument that started the whole thing, after all...


Huh? It's a "compromise" with what they think they can pass in the Dem controlled Senate. You get that, right? I mean, I suppose the House could have passed a bill which cut 1.7 Trillion dollars from Obama's proposed budget as a starting point and then negotiated from there, but it does kinda make sense to do some preliminary analysis and have some meetings with the guys in the other party and in the house prior to putting pen to paper and voting in a budget bill.

That's why I keep saying that the amount the GOP has proposed is already a compromise. And it's a pretty darn huge one if you take into account recent spending increases.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#270 Apr 01 2011 at 2:52 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Huh? It's a "compromise" with what they think they can pass in the Dem controlled Senate. You get that, right?

Right. So you agree that the healthcare bill was a massive compromise with the Republicans versus the single-payer option some people were asking for (and the House passed). Strange that every time you cried that the Democrats wouldn't compromise, you never once mentioned this. Very, very strange indeed.

Hahaha... what a tool. Never change, Gbaji.

Edited, Apr 1st 2011 3:54pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#271 Apr 01 2011 at 3:06 PM Rating: Good
***
1,000 posts
Wait, it's a pre-compromise? Hahahahaha, what a joke.
____________________________
Come on Bill, let's go home
[ffxisig]63311[/ffxisig]
#272 Apr 01 2011 at 3:15 PM Rating: Good
******
30,646 posts
gbaji wrote:
Belkira the Tulip wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Except that the bill that they passed in the House contains the $61B in cuts that the Dems in the Senate are getting upset about. What internal process occurred among the GOP to arrive at that number is kinda unimportant, isn't it?


Not if you want to pretend they were compromising with the Dems in order to get to that $61B from $100B.

I mean, it was your argument that started the whole thing, after all...


Huh? It's a "compromise" with what they think they can pass in the Dem controlled Senate. You get that, right? I mean, I suppose the House could have passed a bill which cut 1.7 Trillion dollars from Obama's proposed budget as a starting point and then negotiated from there, but it does kinda make sense to do some preliminary analysis and have some meetings with the guys in the other party and in the house prior to putting pen to paper and voting in a budget bill.

That's why I keep saying that the amount the GOP has proposed is already a compromise. And it's a pretty darn huge one if you take into account recent spending increases.


Smiley: lol
#273 Apr 01 2011 at 3:18 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
Jophiel wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Huh? It's a "compromise" with what they think they can pass in the Dem controlled Senate. You get that, right?

Right. So you agree that the healthcare bill was a massive compromise with the Republicans versus the single-payer option some people were asking for (and the House passed). Strange that every time you cried that the Democrats wouldn't compromise, you never once mentioned this. Very, very strange indeed.


Lol. You're kidding, right? I know it's April 1st and all, but this is a bit over the top, even for you.


I'll give you a hint why your response makes no sense: The bit about the GOP starting at a position of cutting 1.7 Trillion dollars wasn't just pulled out of thin air. It's the amount that the proposed budget is over budget. Thus, that's the amount of money the Democrats are over spending and makes it a reasonable starting point is to reduce spending by. Cutting that much makes us "even".


As opposed to the "sky's the limit" comparison you're trying to make. Not even a good effort really, even by your standards.

Edited, Apr 1st 2011 2:19pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#274 Apr 01 2011 at 3:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
Backpedal!! Backpedal!! BACKPEDAL!!!!!!!


Hahahahahaa... too funny. Yeah, you're not a partisan hack at all!

Hey, I noticed you're still trying your best to avoid answering where it is you get your news from.

Edited, Apr 1st 2011 4:23pm by Jophiel
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#275 Apr 01 2011 at 3:58 PM Rating: Default
Encyclopedia
******
34,933 posts
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph. Unlike you, I don't sit around regurgitating what others are saying. I'm looking at what you are saying, finding it to be lacking in sense, and pointing out the glaring problems (and stating a few opinions of my own along the way of course).


Here's the deal, in case you're still confused. I'll put it in really simple terms:

When you are doing something "new", that's a new cost. Like spending money on "green jobs", and health care, and god knows what other incredible wastes of money the Dems have been spending money on over the last two years. A "compromise" when doing something new would be to give up something that already exists. So if say a group of people (lets call them "Democrats") want to spend a trillion dollars on some new stuff they think is critically important, that same group should perhaps give up a trillion dollars of spending on other stuff that they already talked us into spending. That way they have to pick which thing they think is *really* important before making us (the taxpayers) pay for their stuff.


But the Dems haven't been doing this. And there's this other group (we'll call them "Conservatives") who have been warning all along that if you keep spending new money on new things, without reducing the amount of money you're continuing to spend on the old things, eventually you'll run out of money and get yourself into trouble. Yes, this is a pretty common sense sorta thing, which most people learn after their first run-in with a credit card in college, but the Dems for some reason forgot that lesson and insisted on doing this anyway. Now we're in financial trouble and the conservatives are trying to come up with things that the Dems should have give up on spending to make up for all the new spending in the first place. Now, to be anywhere near fiscally sane, the amount given up should equal the amount they added, right? But the Dems aren't going to stand for that! Nosirreee! They want to keep spending more money (Bad Dems!). So want to pretend that the new amount of spending isn't really new. It's just normal spending. So we have to compromise from a position of not cutting anything instead of one in which we cut an amount equal to what they increased the spending by.


Is there anyone who really thinks that makes any sense? Really? Because that's what you're arguing here. And yes, I'm well aware of all the wrangling that politicians do over this, but at the end of the day, what matters is that we're spending more than we can afford and have to cut that spending. The amount the GOP put into the house bill is a drop in the proverbial bucket, but it's giving us a really good idea of just how unwilling the Dems are to do anything to take responsibility for all that money they spent. If they're fighting this hard over 61 billion dollars, how on earth are we ever going to make up for the trillions of dollars they've spent over the last few years?



I'd add a prediction, but of course we all know that Obama promised us that our taxes wouldn't go up. Hmmm....
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#276 Apr 01 2011 at 4:15 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
I'm not getting my news from anywhere Joph.

Well, that certainly explains why you keep getting basic facts of the debate wrong. I'm not sure you should be so proud of being ignorant but I guess that's more your problem than it is mine.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 73 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (73)