• 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!

Rasmussen: Rick Perry now up 11 points on GOP field

Status
Not open for further replies.
Conservative said:
What do you think is in the defense budget which was over 600 billion dollars? The Iraq War was winding down in 2009 and it was Obama that ramped up Afghanistan with the surge. How is that working out for us?
Click to expand...
How sad you don't know that Bush funded his wars using supplemental budgets which were above and beyond the annual defense budget.
 
Conservative said:
BEA answered it for me, that was the BEA news release. As for Reagan, what does it matter now what Reagan generated?
Click to expand...
The question is ... why did you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?

How can the BEA speak for you?

How does the BEA know why you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
How sad you don't know that Bush funded his wars using supplemental budgets which were above and beyond the annual defense budget.
Click to expand...

What really is sad is your bad case of BDS. Every post of yours mentions Bush. Maybe you should spend more time trying to boost Obama as it appears he needs a lot of help

38% JAR

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
 
Conservative said:
What really is sad is your bad case of BDS. Every post of yours mentions Bush. Maybe you should spend more time trying to boost Obama as it appears he needs a lot of help

38% JAR

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Click to expand...
Cries a Bush 19%er. :roll:

Still doesn't buy you a clue to the fact that Bush kept his budget down by keeping the cost of his wars out of them. Maybe someday you'll learn about it.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
Cries a Bush 19%er. :roll:

Still doesn't buy you a clue to the fact that Bush kept his budget down by keeping the cost of his wars out of them. Maybe someday you'll learn about it.
Click to expand...

Bush isn't on the ballot and Bush isn't in office. "Your" President is a disaster and it looks like he will be defeated in a landslide. No economic policy, net job losses, and trillions added to the debt. No wonder his JAR is 38%.

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
 
Conservative said:
Bush isn't on the ballot and Bush isn't in office. "Your" President is a disaster and it looks like he will be defeated in a landslide. No economic policy, net job losses, and trillions added to the debt. No wonder his JAR is 38%.

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Click to expand...

The only republicans that could have beaten Obama in a general election have bowed out. But I may be over-estimating the long term memory/intelligence of the electorate on this. I say this because out of the top 4 republicans right now: 2 have too much religious baggage and the other two can't win the primary. Even if Mitt some how wins the primary, hes a rat-fink.
 
xpiher said:
The only republicans that could have beaten Obama in a general election have bowed out. But I may be over-estimating the long term memory/intelligence of the electorate on this. I say this because out of the top 4 republicans right now: 2 have too much religious baggage and the other two can't win the primary. Even if Mitt some how wins the primary, hes a rat-fink.
Click to expand...

Any of the four beats the alternative to what we have right now. The Obama record speaks for itself and seems to be resonating with the public now

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
 
Conservative said:
Bush isn't on the ballot and Bush isn't in office. "Your" President is a disaster and it looks like he will be defeated in a landslide. No economic policy, net job losses, and trillions added to the debt. No wonder his JAR is 38%.

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Click to expand...
This is too funny! You're actually afraid to answer ...

Why do you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?

You know why you're afraid to answer, don't you? Everyone reading this saw you dishonestly cherry-pick higher numbers for Reagan by using "current dollars" while picking lower numbers for Obama by using "chained 2005 dollars." You won't answer because doing so is an admission on your part that you intentionally and dishonestly cherry pick numbers that you like better to suit your position.

Facts don't matter to you...

Results don't matter to you...

Honesty does not matter to you...

All that matters to you is that Obama has a "D" after his name.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
This is too funny! You're actually afraid to answer ...

Why do you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?

You know why you're afraid to answer, don't you? Everyone reading this saw you dishonestly cherry-pick higher numbers for Reagan by using "current dollars" while picking lower numbers for Obama by using "chained 2005 dollars." You won't answer because doing so is an admission on your part that you intentionally and dishonestly cherry pick numbers that you like better to suit your position.

Facts don't matter to you...

Results don't matter to you...

Honesty does not matter to you...

All that matters to you is that Obama has a "D" after his name.
Click to expand...

I posted the BEA news release, you don't like it, take it up with them. It makes no difference what Reagan or Bush did as Obama is in the office now and that is what has to change. Seems he needs you and your bs a lot right now,

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
 
Conservative said:
Any of the four beats the alternative to what we have right now. The Obama record speaks for itself and seems to be resonating with the public now
Click to expand...

The republicans have held up every "jobs" bill since the democrats lost their filibuster proof majority ~6months after Obama took office (when Ted Kennedy died). And whats the first thing the repubs did when taking the house in 2010? Social policy.

You side is right about 1 thing. Obamacare is holding up some job creation. But you are right for the wrong reason. The reason why its holding up job growth isn't the cost it adds to business, its because no one knows if its actually going to exist or not.
 
xpiher said:
The republicans have held up every "jobs" bill since the democrats lost their filibuster proof majority ~6months after Obama took office (when Ted Kennedy died). And whats the first thing the repubs did when taking the house in 2010? Social policy.

You side is right about 1 thing. Obamacare is holding up some job creation. But you are right for the wrong reason. The reason why its holding up job growth isn't the cost it adds to business, its because no one knows if its actually going to exist or not.
Click to expand...

LOL, what jobs bill, the stimulus? Yeah, that really worked out well didn't it. Obama's results are as follows and it has nothing to do with the lack of a filibuster proof Congress. Neither Bush nor Reagan had overwhelming numbers like Obama had. These are his results

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38% JAR and well over 50% disapproval ratings.
 
Conservative said:
I posted the BEA news release, you don't like it, take it up with them. It makes no difference what Reagan or Bush did as Obama is in the office now and that is what has to change. Seems he needs you and your bs a lot right now,

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval
Click to expand...
So you posted a BEA news release, so what? That release doesn't answer the question of why you used "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama. You could have just as easily posted a link to worldnutdaily and achieved the same results of not answering my question.


Why do you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
This is too funny! You're actually afraid to answer ...

Why do you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?

You know why you're afraid to answer, don't you? Everyone reading this saw you dishonestly cherry-pick higher numbers for Reagan by using "current dollars" while picking lower numbers for Obama by using "chained 2005 dollars." You won't answer because doing so is an admission on your part that you intentionally and dishonestly cherry pick numbers that you like better to suit your position.

Facts don't matter to you...

Results don't matter to you...

Honesty does not matter to you...

All that matters to you is that Obama has a "D" after his name.
Click to expand...

I will never vote for someone that had these kind of numbers and competing against someone more conservative. Obama is a leftwing incompetent empty suit.

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 24+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 40% JAR and well over 50% disapproval ratings.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
So you posted a BEA news release, so what? That release doesn't answer the question of why you used "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama. You could have just as easily posted a link to worldnutdaily and achieved the same results of not answering my question.


Why do you use "current dollars" for Reagan but "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama?
Click to expand...

I made a mistake posting Reagan or Bush's numbers at all, they are irrelevant today. These are the relevant numbers

Obama economic results in 2011, .4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011, 25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011, 4 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years, and a downgrade of the U.S. credit rating. Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.67. First President in U.S. History to have our credit downgraded on his watch! 38% JAR and well over 50% disapproval ratings.
 
Conservative said:
LOL, what jobs bill, the stimulus?
Click to expand...

Trade deals mainly. Theres been 3 or 4 major ones that would bring billions of dollars to the US thus creating jobs but the repubs refused to let them on the floor until the rich got their tax break and then refused until the spending was cut during the debt debate. Blaming Obama for lack of job creation is like blaming Bush for the economic crash. Its a retarded talking point the proves the person making the claim doesn't understand how a job is created nor how the economy functions.

Go read more about the economy.
 
Conservative said:
I will never vote for someone that had these kind of numbers and competing against someone more conservative.
Click to expand...
Suuure, Con, uh-huh. Like you wouldn't be voting for McCain next year had he won in 2008 and had the same results as Obama.

Can I see a show of hands ... who is buying that BS?
 
Conservative said:
That is on the Obama record. Don't recall you blaming Clinton for the 2001 deficit and adding that to the Clinton deficit
Click to expand...

Bush came into office in 2000, which is why the first year he's credited with is 2001. See how that works?
 
xpiher said:
Trade deals mainly. Theres been 3 or 4 major ones that would bring billions of dollars to the US thus creating jobs but the repubs refused to let them on the floor until the rich got their tax break and then refused until the spending was cut during the debt debate. Blaming Obama for lack of job creation is like blaming Bush for the economic crash. Its a retarded talking point the proves the person making the claim doesn't understand how a job is created nor how the economy functions.

Go read more about the economy.
Click to expand...

You are kidding, right, trade deals? Democrats are holding up the trade deal because of the union influence. Bush put together the Columbian and South Korea deal that was defeated by Democrats.
 
AdamT said:
Bush came into office in 2000, which is why the first year he's credited with is 2001. See how that works?
Click to expand...

Really? How old are you? The election was in November 2000 and he took office in January 2001.
 
Conservative said:
I made a mistake posting Reagan or Bush's numbers at all, they are irrelevant today.
Click to expand...
But post them you did and you dishonestly posted "current dollars" for Reagan while posting "chained 2005 dollars" for Obama.

And now you are twisting yourself into a pretzel just to avoid answering ... why you did that?
 
Lol - I can't stop laughing from some liberal posters...Which tells me how really terrified of Perry, you truly are.

Disregard him as a serious contender at your own peril.
 
Conservative said:
You are kidding, right, trade deals? Democrats are holding up the trade deal because of the union influence. Bush put together the Columbian and South Korea deal that was defeated by Democrats.
Click to expand...

You may be right, I only herd about them recently. Doesn't change the larger point that repubs threatened filibuster until they got their way, the blaming the current economy on Obama is like blaming the recession on Bush, etc.

ric27 said:
Lol - I can't stop laughing from some liberal posters...Which tells me how really terrified of Perry, you truly are.


Disregard him as a serious contender at your own peril.
Click to expand...


He is a serious contender, but thats not because he'd be a good president. His record in Texas is a very mixed bag and not as rosey as he or Fox tries to make it out to be, especially with job creation. For instance, unemployment is 8.8 in Texas making meaning that population growth is the main reason why jobs have been created in Texas, not economic policy.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom