US pres election: your vote
#101
Posted 23 June 2008 - 02:51 AM
Yeah, even if you're not happy with any of the candidates, vote for whoever comes the closest to being what you want. Or we're taking your card.
Error: Signature not valid
#102
Posted 23 June 2008 - 03:16 AM
Hell, do a write in
, just vote.
Aren't any of the McCain supporters worried about his age and the fact that he doesn't look to healthy? Is that an issue to any of his supporters?
Aren't any of the McCain supporters worried about his age and the fact that he doesn't look to healthy? Is that an issue to any of his supporters?
#103
Posted 23 June 2008 - 04:32 AM
(not a mccain supporter, but I'll field the question)
I think the age thing is every bit as relevant as saying Obama is young and inexperienced. I.E. just political punditry that distracts from actual issues.
I think the age thing is every bit as relevant as saying Obama is young and inexperienced. I.E. just political punditry that distracts from actual issues.
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#104
Posted 23 June 2008 - 04:34 AM
No I mean as a concern for his actual health. He doesn't look that healthy. I agree that being old or young doesn't really matter...but health does.
I almost feel sorry for McCain..he finally is the nominee and he needs a miracle to win. Though stranger things have happened.
I almost feel sorry for McCain..he finally is the nominee and he needs a miracle to win. Though stranger things have happened.
#105
Posted 23 June 2008 - 06:34 AM
My doom-and-gloom side says he'll win. I hope not though. There will likely be some shenanigans going on during the election.
Error: Signature not valid
#106
Posted 23 June 2008 - 06:37 AM
Yeah they'll probably close the polls early where Democratic support is strong....that's a tactic they like to pull 
I'm hoping for a less "dirty" campaign from both sides....sigh...I know...I'm naive.
I'm hoping for a less "dirty" campaign from both sides....sigh...I know...I'm naive.
#107
Posted 23 June 2008 - 07:04 AM
I read an article after the last election where poll workers were saying that they waited until it was almost time for the polls to close, and if no one was around they just started casting votes for registered voters who never showed up. And electronic voting booths are hackable.
Error: Signature not valid
#108
Posted 24 June 2008 - 03:25 PM
Barack and Taxes:
"A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that under Social Security's current rules, young college graduates will contribute about 5 percent of their lifetime earnings. Under Obama's proposal, that number would rise to almost 9 percent, taking these individuals' overall lifetime tax rate from 45 percent to 49 percent. By voting for Obama, a 22-year-old young college graduate earning $40,000 per year today would be opting to surrender an additional 4 percent of his lifetime earnings to the Social Security administration — and may get no benefits in return.
Put another way, Obama is proposing to significantly reduce the economic value of the college degrees his young supporters are struggling to attain and pay for."
-----------------------------
"Barack Obama is in favor of nearly doubling the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to 28 percent.
We examined the impact of capital-gains tax rates on investors realizing their gains. As the tax rate increases, investors hold their gains to avoid paying the higher tax. Conversely, lowering the capital-gains tax rate spurs realizations. Interestingly, the 1986 Tax Reform Act increased the capital-gains tax rate from 20 to 28 percent, but investors were given roughly three months before the tax increase was enacted into law. In turn, investors rushed to realize their gains before the higher tax rate kicked in, and capital-gains realizations remained depressed for nearly a decade thereafter with the higher tax rate in place.... Therefore, proposals to raise tax revenue from capital-gains tax increases will be scored as a net revenue gain to pay for new spending, but in reality, the tax revenue may not materialize, which will force tax increases elsewhere to pay for spending."
"A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that under Social Security's current rules, young college graduates will contribute about 5 percent of their lifetime earnings. Under Obama's proposal, that number would rise to almost 9 percent, taking these individuals' overall lifetime tax rate from 45 percent to 49 percent. By voting for Obama, a 22-year-old young college graduate earning $40,000 per year today would be opting to surrender an additional 4 percent of his lifetime earnings to the Social Security administration — and may get no benefits in return.
Put another way, Obama is proposing to significantly reduce the economic value of the college degrees his young supporters are struggling to attain and pay for."
-----------------------------
"Barack Obama is in favor of nearly doubling the capital-gains tax rate from 15 percent to 28 percent.
We examined the impact of capital-gains tax rates on investors realizing their gains. As the tax rate increases, investors hold their gains to avoid paying the higher tax. Conversely, lowering the capital-gains tax rate spurs realizations. Interestingly, the 1986 Tax Reform Act increased the capital-gains tax rate from 20 to 28 percent, but investors were given roughly three months before the tax increase was enacted into law. In turn, investors rushed to realize their gains before the higher tax rate kicked in, and capital-gains realizations remained depressed for nearly a decade thereafter with the higher tax rate in place.... Therefore, proposals to raise tax revenue from capital-gains tax increases will be scored as a net revenue gain to pay for new spending, but in reality, the tax revenue may not materialize, which will force tax increases elsewhere to pay for spending."
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#109
Posted 24 June 2008 - 03:27 PM
source please Shin.
Monster Hunter World Iceborne: It's like hunting monsters, but on crack, but the monsters are also on crack.
#110
Posted 24 June 2008 - 05:03 PM
1) http://www.cato.org/...php?pub_id=9218
2) http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commer...ment-taxes.html
2) http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commer...ment-taxes.html
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#111
Posted 25 June 2008 - 03:10 PM
This is an interesting article on Obama's plan for Social Security. The two things that concern me most are
"At the margin, this taxpayer now takes home 62.3% of his earnings, a figure that will drop to 47% under the Obama plan. According to a widely accepted economics rule of thumb, the entrepreneur's taxable profit would drop by 11.2%."
and
"In other words, Sen. Obama is planning on a combined series of tax hikes to produce $42,000 in tax revenue, but consensus economic modeling suggests the government's net take would rise only $14,000.....It is shocking to think that we have a presidential candidate who would make the private sector $5 poorer in order to make the government $1 richer. More likely, given the calculated political design of the proposal, no one in the Obama campaign told the candidate about the economic, ethical or historical consequences of his suggestion."
First of all, by any measure and I don't care how rich you are, I don't see justification for ANY taxpayer to pay more than 50% of what they earn. The very concept disturbs me.
Second, it's typical liberal math: take away more money from the individual taxpayer, with the actual benefits from doing so resulting in a measely 20% of the money lost.
Full article here (edited to add the article, because like a dummy I forgot to)
http://www.wsj.com/article/SB1213917055739...mod=fpa_mostpop
"At the margin, this taxpayer now takes home 62.3% of his earnings, a figure that will drop to 47% under the Obama plan. According to a widely accepted economics rule of thumb, the entrepreneur's taxable profit would drop by 11.2%."
and
"In other words, Sen. Obama is planning on a combined series of tax hikes to produce $42,000 in tax revenue, but consensus economic modeling suggests the government's net take would rise only $14,000.....It is shocking to think that we have a presidential candidate who would make the private sector $5 poorer in order to make the government $1 richer. More likely, given the calculated political design of the proposal, no one in the Obama campaign told the candidate about the economic, ethical or historical consequences of his suggestion."
First of all, by any measure and I don't care how rich you are, I don't see justification for ANY taxpayer to pay more than 50% of what they earn. The very concept disturbs me.
Second, it's typical liberal math: take away more money from the individual taxpayer, with the actual benefits from doing so resulting in a measely 20% of the money lost.
Full article here (edited to add the article, because like a dummy I forgot to)
http://www.wsj.com/article/SB1213917055739...mod=fpa_mostpop
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#112
Posted 27 June 2008 - 01:19 PM
Hmm, I post something negative about Obama and the thread goes dead.
Um... Ok, I'll get things rolling again.
"McCain is too old!" "McCain is George W. Bush's 3rd term."
You're now free to carry on as before.
Um... Ok, I'll get things rolling again.
"McCain is too old!" "McCain is George W. Bush's 3rd term."
You're now free to carry on as before.
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#113
Posted 27 June 2008 - 04:56 PM
taxes are always the old fallback of the democrats
mccain has stated hes going to promote small business/entreprenuers because they are what drives the economy(he notes ebay as a place where entreprenuers currently are having success and wants that type of american ingenuity to help the economy reestablish itself)
mccain has stated hes going to promote small business/entreprenuers because they are what drives the economy(he notes ebay as a place where entreprenuers currently are having success and wants that type of american ingenuity to help the economy reestablish itself)
#114
Posted 27 June 2008 - 06:00 PM
Charles Krauthammer (not quite a voice I normally lend credence to) has some very good points to make about Obama in this Op Ed piece:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8062603653.html
The man does have a good point. The press is way to lenient with Obama... even during the primaries, when they were busy skewering Clinton, they gave him a free pass.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8062603653.html
Quote
Normally, flip-flopping presidential candidates have to worry about the press. Not Obama. After all, this is a press corps that heard his grandiloquent Philadelphia speech -- designed to rationalize why "I can no more disown [Jeremiah Wright] than I can disown my white grandmother" -- then wiped away a tear and hailed him as the second coming of Abraham Lincoln. Three months later, with Wright disowned, grandma embraced and the great "race speech" now inoperative, not a word of reconsideration is heard from his media acolytes.
Worry about the press? His FISA flip-flop elicited a few grumbles from lefty bloggers, but hardly a murmur from the mainstream press. Remember his pledge to stick to public financing? Now flush with cash, he is the first general-election candidate since Watergate to opt out. Some goo-goo clean-government types chided him, but the mainstream editorialists who for years had been railing against private financing as hopelessly corrupt and corrupting evinced only the mildest of disappointment.
...
The truth about Obama is uncomplicated. He is just a politician (though of unusual skill and ambition). The man who dared say it plainly is the man who knows Obama all too well. "He does what politicians do," explained Jeremiah Wright.
When it's time to throw campaign finance reform, telecom accountability, NAFTA renegotiation or Jeremiah Wright overboard, Obama is not sentimental. He does not hesitate. He tosses lustily.
Worry about the press? His FISA flip-flop elicited a few grumbles from lefty bloggers, but hardly a murmur from the mainstream press. Remember his pledge to stick to public financing? Now flush with cash, he is the first general-election candidate since Watergate to opt out. Some goo-goo clean-government types chided him, but the mainstream editorialists who for years had been railing against private financing as hopelessly corrupt and corrupting evinced only the mildest of disappointment.
...
The truth about Obama is uncomplicated. He is just a politician (though of unusual skill and ambition). The man who dared say it plainly is the man who knows Obama all too well. "He does what politicians do," explained Jeremiah Wright.
When it's time to throw campaign finance reform, telecom accountability, NAFTA renegotiation or Jeremiah Wright overboard, Obama is not sentimental. He does not hesitate. He tosses lustily.
The man does have a good point. The press is way to lenient with Obama... even during the primaries, when they were busy skewering Clinton, they gave him a free pass.
Forum Member from the Old Days. Alive, but mostly inactive/ occasionally lurking
#115
Posted 27 June 2008 - 07:40 PM
Skywalker;340239 said:
Charles Krauthammer (not quite a voice I normally lend credence to) has some very good points to make about Obama in this Op Ed piece:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8062603653.html
The man does have a good point. The press is way to lenient with Obama... even during the primaries, when they were busy skewering Clinton, they gave him a free pass.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8062603653.html
The man does have a good point. The press is way to lenient with Obama... even during the primaries, when they were busy skewering Clinton, they gave him a free pass.
The whole Rev. Wright thing just kept blowing up in his face though. Every time you turned on the tv that guy was saying something crazy. Obama tried to be cool about him, but the guy wouldn't shut up.
Error: Signature not valid
#116
Posted 27 June 2008 - 09:30 PM
Ebay? They're having some serious problems over there. Buying is down and the new Ebay anti-seller policies have chased off a lot of long time ebayers. You should see the flap happening on message boards about the new policies.
You’ve never heard of the Silanda? … It’s the ship that made the Warren of Telas run in less than 12 parsecs.
#117
Posted 27 June 2008 - 10:59 PM
im not talking about ebay as a company, just as a successful business idea that allows/allowed small time entreprenuers to do something they otherwise would not have done and kind of sparked a sub-industry of sorts.
#118
Posted 27 June 2008 - 11:55 PM
So you're not interested in whether it works, or how successful it is, just whether or not it sounds good?
I can see why you like McCain's economic policies then.
I can see why you like McCain's economic policies then.
#119
Posted 28 June 2008 - 12:02 AM
Dolorous Menhir;340445 said:
So you're not interested in whether it works, or how successful it is, just whether or not it sounds good?
I can see why you like McCain's economic policies then.
I can see why you like McCain's economic policies then.
To be fair, it's not just his theory, it's the entire conservative/regeanomics/trickle down theory policy. McCain is just the most recent spouter of such silly things.
Error: Signature not valid
#120
Posted 28 June 2008 - 12:09 AM
Something just occured to me...
Obama = David Palmer! :eek:
Anyone seen the "Thank You Hilary" video yet? It's interesting because I think she is quite gracious (publicly) and I would love to see how she is taking it in private...
Obama = David Palmer! :eek:
Anyone seen the "Thank You Hilary" video yet? It's interesting because I think she is quite gracious (publicly) and I would love to see how she is taking it in private...
A Haunting Poem
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.
I Scream
You Scream
We all Scream
For I Scream.

Help















