• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Frustrated liberals want more from Obama [W:299]

Right -- as expected, a ridiculous interpretation by you. What Obama was obviously saying is that it's very easy for Romney and republicans to take pot shots at him, but they haven't offered any positive proposals of their own.

There is a huge pile of just such "positive proposals" sitting in the "not to do pile" controlled by Reid in the senate, bills that have been passed by the house, yet just sit gathering dust awaiting senate "action". Demorats dare not allow these to be voted on in the senate, better to keep saying, as you do, that they simply do not exist. ;-)
 
Last edited:
Right -- as expected, a ridiculous interpretation by you. What Obama was obviously saying is that it's very easy for Romney and republicans to take pot shots at him, but they haven't offered any positive proposals of their own.

Oh but they have!

Stop throwing taxpayer money at fly-by-night companies like Solyndra, for example. Stop spending money that you don't have.

You really haven't heard any of this?
 
I disagree, I think the left thinks he's too liberal. However, a February gallup poll shows that the left thinks Obama is just about right, proving both of us wrong on that point. Half Say Obama Too Liberal, but 47% Agree With Him on Issues

You have to remember though, the Democratic platform of today is further left from the Democratic platform of 100, 50, or even 25 years ago. Same with the Republican platform. We've all been slowly migrating left while there are those like myself who see that migration and want both parties to return to their original beliefs, focusing on the foundations of this country that made it great.

Isn't that funny that the same exact percent that agree with Obama on the issues pay absolutely no income tax?

Just an observation.
 
Isn't that funny that the same exact percent that agree with Obama on the issues pay absolutely no income tax?

Just an observation.

Yes, you've got half the population paying taxes and the other half not paying taxes, with the latter claiming the others don't pay enough.

There are some, Barrack Obama among them, who figure this is 'social justice'.
 
Yes, you've got half the population paying taxes and the other half not paying taxes, with the latter claiming the others don't pay enough.

There are some, Barrack Obama among them, who figure this is 'social justice'.

Nearly everyone pays some taxes. You need to be more accurate. You also need to realize more people have dropped below the line because of hard times. It makes a difference.
 
Neither the dems or the GOP are happy with who is running, and with good reason. Obama is no where near a true liberal, and Romney is no where near a true conservative. Its a role they play at election time, nothing more. Both are progressive corprratists who are simply licking the hands that give them cash and or elect them. Nothing more. The U.S. loses big time with either of them.
 
Neither the dems or the GOP are happy with who is running, and with good reason. Obama is no where near a true liberal, and Romney is no where near a true conservative. Its a role they play at election time, nothing more. Both are progressive corprratists who are simply licking the hands that give them cash and or elect them. Nothing more. The U.S. loses big time with either of them.

There isn't enough difference between them or the parties. I agree with that.
 
He is the lesser of two evils. I want Jed Bush. Romney is an ______
 
Nearly everyone pays some taxes. You need to be more accurate. You also need to realize more people have dropped below the line because of hard times. It makes a difference.

So despite Barrack Obama and taxes being mentioned you didn't realize I was talking about the federal government? You need greater accuracy or you'll get confused?

And these hard times are a direct consequence of Barry Obama and his ideas of redistributing wealth and 'social justice'.

Of course the leftists didn't see this coming, or perhaps don't really care, but I feel those in the middle have it all figured out by now and will correct the serious error they made in the last election.
 
So despite Barrack Obama and taxes being mentioned you didn't realize I was talking about the federal government? You need greater accuracy or you'll get confused?

And these hard times are a direct consequence of Barry Obama and his ideas of redistributing wealth and 'social justice'.

Of course the leftists didn't see this coming, or perhaps don't really care, but I feel those in the middle have it all figured out by now and will correct the serious error they made in the last election.

Whether I realized it or not is not the point. You said something incorrect.

And no, no president, not Obama, not Bush, controls the economy. You give them too much credit and too much blame. It's a fools game.
 
It is what it is. Obama is a better choice than Romney, though Romney is better than the others that ran with the possibile exception of Paul.

Ron Paul is a better choice than Romney.

Mitt Romney has a liberal track record.

Ron Paul would never support RomneyCare/ObamaCare.
 
Ron Paul is a better choice than Romney.

Mitt Romney has a liberal track record.

Ron Paul would never support RomneyCare/ObamaCare.

Yes, I prefer Paul over Romney. And I prefer a single payer (two teired system) over current healthcare reform. The public option was a better choice. Paul is not a perfect candidate. Being better than Romney is not saying that much. It was a very weak republican field. The only chance republicans have is to paint Obama worse than he is.
 
Whether I realized it or not is not the point. You said something incorrect.

Incorrect? Where did i say something incorrect? Could you be more accurate?

And no, no president, not Obama, not Bush, controls the economy. You give them too much credit and too much blame. It's a fools game.

Well it's clear that the economy is out of control under Obama's watch so perhaps it's time the people elected a president who does have an understanding how the economy works.
 
Incorrect? Where did i say something incorrect? Could you be more accurate?

Do you not read what you write:

Yes, you've got half the population paying taxes and the other half not paying taxes, with the latter claiming the others don't pay enough.

The whole thing is a misrepresentation, but the underlined part is false.




Well it's clear that the economy is out of control under Obama's watch so perhaps it's time the people elected a president who does have an understanding how the economy works.

Only to a nonthinking partisan. I repeat, no president controls the economy. Sorry.
 
Do you not read what you write: Yes, you've got half the population paying taxes and the other half not paying taxes, with the latter claiming the others don't pay enough.

Oh, yes, and that confused you because, despite mentioning BHO, you thought i might be referring to a sales tax, state tax, or some other tax that might be hovering somewhere in your imagination. Things have to be explained to you very carefully, I see.
The whole thing is a misrepresentation, but the underlined part is false.

Could you be more accurate please? Where was the misrepresentation or the inaccuracy?

In the context of the conversation any normal person would readily understand the accuracy of the statement. That you don't understand context hardly makes the statement inaccurate. It only means you are easily befuddled.
Only to a nonthinking partisan. I repeat, no president controls the economy. Sorry.

You are sorry no president controls the economy? That means poor Barack Obama made all his promises for nada. If only he had known!
 
Oh, yes, and that confused you because, despite mentioning BHO, you thought i might be referring to a sales tax, state tax, or some other tax that might be hovering somewhere in your imagination. Things have to be explained to you very carefully, I see.

It's a false statement. Simple as that.

Could you be more accurate please? Where was the misrepresentation or the inaccuracy?

In the context of the conversation any normal person would readily understand the accuracy of the statement. That you don't understand context hardly makes the statement inaccurate. It only means you are easily befuddled.

Yes, you mentioned state taxes, but that's not all they pay:

And the group doesn't necessarily get off scot-free when it comes to payroll taxes -- which support Social Security and Medicare.

More than two-thirds -- or 49 million of the 69 million households -- pay payroll tax. Of those, 34 million end up paying more in payroll taxes than they get back on their federal return. The other 15 million pay payroll tax but they get enough refundable credits to offset what they paid

45% of households owe no federal income tax for 2010 - Apr. 17, 2011

■These figures cover only the federal income tax and ignore the substantial amounts of other federal taxes — especially the payroll tax — that many of these households pay. As a result, these figures greatly overstate the share of households that do not pay federal taxes. Tax Policy Center data show that only about 17 percent of households did not pay any federal income tax or payroll tax in 2009, despite the high unemployment and temporary tax cuts that marked that year.[5] In 2007, a more typical year, the figure was 14 percent. This percentage would be even lower if it reflected other federal taxes that households pay, including excise taxes on gasoline and other items.
■Most of the people who pay neither federal income tax nor payroll taxes are low-income people who are elderly, unable to work due to a serious disability, or students, most of whom subsequently become taxpayers. (In years like the last few, this group also includes a significant number of people who have been unemployed the entire year and cannot find work.)

Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

SO, you see, you are both factually wrong, and you mnisrepresent the issue. This is typical of partisan silliness, but you shouldn't expect everyone to play.

BTW, while none of us speak for everyone, many have only argued that letting the Bush tax cuts end, going back to a previous rate, would be fine. In that context, it has been noted how much the wealthy and business actually benefit from the government. Looking at the entire picture is fair.

You are sorry no president controls the economy? That means poor Barack Obama made all his promises for nada. If only he had known!

Yep, just all the others have. They know it normally is a Cyclical event, and hope that it will turn while they are in office. But, it garners voters if they can blame someone else and then take credit. Those who play that game, well, what is that about sheeple? So, you should have known. You should also know, because it is simple math, that if you shrink the government, you lose those jobs and it takes time, a lot of time for anything to swing around.
 
Do you not read what you write:

Yes, you've got half the population paying taxes and the other half not paying taxes, with the latter claiming the others don't pay enough.

The whole thing is a misrepresentation, but the underlined part is false.






Only to a nonthinking partisan. I repeat, no president controls the economy. Sorry.
So then by your statement, Clinton gets zero credit for the economic boom of the 90's? Hell, even I had given him some.
 
If we think ObamaCare/RomneyCare is a bad idea, they why are we nominating Romney?
Good question. The GOP has been hijacked and currently, the voters are not left with a good conservative choice for candidates. I believe that Romney will not be strong enough or come off with enough of a difference to sway enough of the middle, and will not energize the base enough to overcome Obama. We will be looking at 4 more years unfortunately. During that four years though, there will be a political civil war within the GOP and either conservatives will branch off or they will overtake the neocon progressives. Not sure which way it will go.
 
If we think ObamaCare/RomneyCare is a bad idea, they why are we nominating Romney?

Do you think Romney supports Obamacare? Or anything like it for the nation?
 
There are real differences between the two. Obama doesn't try and excuse torture as merely enhanced interogation techniques.


The only difference is that one was bold and was forced to shoot his mouth off and the other is not. And enhanced interrogation techniques persist. We just don't talk about it anymore. Just like GITMO. Hell, even the use of dogs is ignored now. You have to admit how very passive CNN and Democrats have become. Crap they used to whine about is acceptable enough to ignore today. And FOX doesn't hit on these matters because they would appear as hypocrits for defending it under Bush. It's all BS and there really is no difference between the two. Why do you think Obama was quick to "forgive" the waterboarding under Bush once he entered the White House? The White House may have changed color, but the world did not. It was the same under Clinton. Bush was unlucky enough to have to be the face when all of this was being blasted in the media and protestors forced definitions and explanations in the heat of shallow protesting.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom