Conquer Club

comic boy wrote:Obama = Election winner.
Mittens = Election loser.
Case is closed , those that dont like it will just have to suck it up and try again in 4 years , gonna be much harder then though because the economy will be a lot stronger.

Phatscotty wrote:

comic boy wrote:Obama = Election winner.
Mittens = Election loser.
Case is closed , those that dont like it will just have to suck it up and try again in 4 years , gonna be much harder then though because the economy will be a lot stronger.

precious foreigners....

yeah, when a country gets it's credit rating downgraded 3 times in 1 year, usually that means a roaring recovery is right around the corner!

It’s an undisputed fact that the American people have a high level of distrust for the mainstream media — just look at the startling Gallup numbers released last week. A recent decision by CBS News to omit a portion of an interview with President Barack Obama in which he admitted mistakes and blunders in campaign ads is likely to add to the lack of public confidence in mainstream outlets.

In an interview for “60 Minutes,” Obama surprisingly contended that some of his campaign ads and contentions “go overboard” and have errors, but these admissions were omitted from the final interview that aired.
Obama Admits Going Overboard, Campaign Ad Mistakes in CBS Interview

While the network left this portion of the president’s dialogue with Steve Kroft out, CBS did post it on its web site. Still, conservative critics are wondering why such a noteworthy admission was left out of the final interview.

After all, a candidate’s claim that he has put out misleading campaign advertisements that have “gone overboard” is certainly not something that would generally be cut from a broadcast interview — particularly when it’s a candidate who has prided himself on truth and transparency.

Titled, “False Advertising in the Presidential Race,” the clip appears on the CBS web site with an intriguing description: ”President Obama says some of his campaign ads might ‘go overboard’ or contain mistakes, but most of them simply highlight the differences between him and Gov. Romney.”

In this portion of the interview, Kroft tells Obama that fact-checkers have taken issue with both candidates’ ads. When explaining that some of Obama’s ads are misleading, the journalist also questioned whether these false statements to the American people are disturbing to the president. The response was fascinating.

“Do we see sometimes us going overboard in our campaign, are there mistakes that are made, areas where there is no doubt somebody could dispute how we are presenting things?,” Obama asked. “You know, that happens in politics.”

“Aren’t the American entitled to the truth? Or a better version of it?,” Kroft countered.

Perhaps realizing he had gone a bit too far in his admission, Obama steered away from the subject of campaign lies and turned the conversation back to a discussion about America’s future.

“The truth of the matter is, most of the time we’re having a vigorous debate about a vision for the country and, you know, there’s a lot at stake in this election,” Obama explained. “So is it going to be sharp sometimes? Absolutely. But will the American people ultimately have a good sense of where I want to take the country and where Gov. Romney takes the country? I think they will.”

comic boy wrote:

patrickaa317 wrote:

comic boy wrote:Obama = Election winner.
Mittens = Election loser.
Case is closed , those that dont like it will just have to suck it up and try again in 4 years , gonna be much harder then though because the economy will be a lot stronger.

Sure the hell hope it isn't any weaker.

If Obama is reelected, I wouldn't be surprised to start hearing of talks of removing term limits.

I would be even more surprised if you gave Obama any credit whatsoever if the economy does improve significantly.

Gypsys Kiss wrote:Can someone point me towards a break down of this 47%. The implication by some is that they are all freeloading, feckless guttersnipes, but since the US unemployment figure for August 2012 is 8.1%, there seems to be a large hole in the figures.

Does the 47% include the elderly? Does it include those mentally or phsyically incapable of working? Does it include ex-soldiers seriously injured in the line of duty?

Who does it include?

Gypsys Kiss wrote:Can someone point me towards a break down of this 47%. The implication by some is that they are all freeloading, feckless guttersnipes, but since the US unemployment figure for August 2012 is 8.1%, there seems to be a large hole in the figures.

Does the 47% include the elderly? Does it include those mentally or phsyically incapable of working? Does it include ex-soldiers seriously injured in the line of duty?


Who does it include?

thegreekdog wrote:Heh... guttersnipes.

AndyDufresne wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Heh... guttersnipes.

Is that like Wesley Snipes?


--Andy

AndyDufresne wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Heh... guttersnipes.

Is that like Wesley Snipes?


--Andy

Gypsys Kiss wrote:Can someone point me towards a break down of this 47%. The implication by some is that they are all freeloading, feckless guttersnipes, but since the US unemployment figure for August 2012 is 8.1%, there seems to be a large hole in the figures.

Does the 47% include the elderly? Does it include those mentally or phsyically incapable of working? Does it include ex-soldiers seriously injured in the line of duty?


Who does it include?

Night Strike wrote:

Gypsys Kiss wrote:Can someone point me towards a break down of this 47%. The implication by some is that they are all freeloading, feckless guttersnipes, but since the US unemployment figure for August 2012 is 8.1%, there seems to be a large hole in the figures.

Does the 47% include the elderly? Does it include those mentally or phsyically incapable of working? Does it include ex-soldiers seriously injured in the line of duty?


Who does it include?

47% of people in the US do not pay federal income taxes. They range from people that do not work, do not make enough money, deduct their taxes down to nothing, retirees, etc. Romney made an inaccurate statement in claiming that they're all freeloaders, but his statement that they would not relate to his desire to cut taxes is still true.

Gypsys Kiss wrote:

AndyDufresne wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Heh... guttersnipes.

Is that like Wesley Snipes?


--Andy

Younger brother.

comic boy wrote:

Phatscotty wrote:

comic boy wrote:Obama = Election winner.
Mittens = Election loser.
Case is closed , those that dont like it will just have to suck it up and try again in 4 years , gonna be much harder then though because the economy will be a lot stronger.

precious foreigners....

yeah, when a country gets it's credit rating downgraded 3 times in 1 year, usually that means a roaring recovery is right around the corner!

And yet Obama is still going to win the election as I predicted , I guess a wise foreigner trumps a delusional local
PS does a timescale of 4 additional years equate to round the corner in your mind , I knew you were a bit slow but thats amazing

Metsfanmax wrote:http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/

"Nov. 2: For Romney to Win, State Polls Must Be Statistically Biased"

Woodruff wrote:Honestly, I cannot envision a scenario at this point in which he loses the election without some sort of a major scandal (and by "scandal", I mean an actual scandal, not an "I don't like this policy of his" scandal).

And you guys seem to agree with me, because you sound exceptionally desperate.

Night Strike wrote:

Gypsys Kiss wrote:Can someone point me towards a break down of this 47%. The implication by some is that they are all freeloading, feckless guttersnipes, but since the US unemployment figure for August 2012 is 8.1%, there seems to be a large hole in the figures.

Does the 47% include the elderly? Does it include those mentally or phsyically incapable of working? Does it include ex-soldiers seriously injured in the line of duty?


Who does it include?

47% of people in the US do not pay federal income taxes. They range from people that do not work, do not make enough money, deduct their taxes down to nothing, retirees, etc. Romney made an inaccurate statement in claiming that they're all freeloaders, but his statement that they would not relate to his desire to cut taxes is still true.

By the way, I thought this topic was about Obama, not Romney.

notyou2 wrote:Apparently you were WRONG PS.