What do you expect with a possible BHO loss in November? [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : What do you expect with a possible BHO loss in November?


DoctaGlockta
06-06-2012, 12:44
With the recent win in WI of Scott Walker and the response to that win from the Liberal Progressives (threats, including death threats) I have to wonder what will be the response with a BHO loss in November.

I can't see things going very well in the short term after the election. I'm not trying to fear monger here just look realistically at the situation and attempt to prepare accordingly.

glock_19guy1983
06-06-2012, 12:52
same response if he wins. Riots, looting, and cars burned and overturned. Just like when the saints lose or win.

NDCent
06-06-2012, 13:09
Probably a good thing the GZ trial isn't expected until next year.

Numismatist
06-06-2012, 13:12
:rofl: Let's get through the Supreme Court dumping healthcare first :laughing:

pugman
06-06-2012, 13:40
As a life long Wisconsinite, I can tell you Walker "winning" (he already won...this recall was just to appease a greedy union) hasn't changed anything.

This county and state is as divided today as it has been the past ten years....I dare to say it might even be more so. I know a lot of people who voted for Walker just as a middle finger to the union - it wasn't about money, CCW, taxes, etc

Most polls here in Wisconsin have Obama leading by as much as 14 points; although whispers from his campaign have called Wisconsin now a coin-toss state.

Think about this objectively for a second: the recall was fueled by the fact Walker took a little something from public workers. This recall was spearheaded by the union. Greece's financial crisis has a lot of causes..the rioting was fueled more by the series of austerities imposed on the people...in other words Greece took a little something from a large entitlement class.

If Romney wins, and he doesn't touch the entitlements, those potential rioters won't do a darn thing. Very few people in this country vote conscious, morals or something intangible - when it gets down to it I bet 75-80% of this country votes pocketbook. Who will fill mine with yours or let me keep more of mine from you. I haven't read anything which leads me to believe Romney will touch those on the dole

From his own website I see nothing in his plan about cutting those programs.


http://www.mittromney.com/issues/labor

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/spending

http://www.mittromney.com/issues/social-security

Look at social security. Right from the site "President Obama has had three years in office, during which time he has attacked every serious proposal to preserve and strengthen America’s entitlement programs"

We shouldn't be looking at ways to maintain these programs - someone should be seriously looking at ways to eliminate them. Every economist under the sun knows Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, etc are simply unsustainable in the long term.

If O loses and R wins...as long as those government checks keep printing no one will bat an eye. I will vote...and as always I vote issues and results...which basically means I will vote for anyone not Obama

Bushflyr
06-06-2012, 13:40
Massive deregulation of the financial markets, followed by a short run up, then a massive crash that makes the Bush recession look like a mouse fart.

Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

quake
06-06-2012, 14:03
As far as:
...Very few people in this country vote conscious, morals or something intangible...
goes,


This right here:
...when it gets down to it I bet 75-80% of this country votes pocketbook. Who will fill mine with yours or let me keep more of mine from you.
absolutely IS me voting my conscience & morals. My morals include "what's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours. I'll agree to help people out of what's mine when I can, and I'd like them to agree to not take what's mine by force".

The state our nation is in now, for an honest working person, voting "pocketbook" is absolutely equal to voting "morals" nowadays.

Carry16
06-06-2012, 16:19
IMHO stay away from the big cities and everything will be fine....same as always.

Bolster
06-06-2012, 16:30
Most polls here in Wisconsin have Obama leading by as much as 14 points; although whispers from his campaign have called Wisconsin now a coin-toss state.

One thing that was surely exposed (again!) was the bankrupt nature of the "polls," run by the same crowd as runs the media. I was watching the day closely from Calif., and we were hearing either (a) it was too close to call or (b) the massive turnout favored the Sociali... uh, the Democrats. All of that was BS. In the world of politics a 7 point win is a big, comfortable win.

So those same exit polls that were so wrong on Walker, are now considered accurately predictive of a 14 pt Obama lead? Pfff, my BS detector is overheating. The media will be shoveling shirt (minus 'r') until the election is over, and then they'll shovel a different load of it.

We don't have a mainstream media anymore; it's an adjunct to the Sociali... dang, I did it again: I mean the Democrat party.

Anybody hear little-man Blitzer on CNN get all depressed as he had to announce Walker's win? LOL! LOL!

absolutely IS me voting my conscience & morals. My morals include "what's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours. I'll agree to help people out of what's mine when I can, and I'd like them to agree to not take what's mine by force".
The state our nation is in now, for an honest working person, voting "pocketbook" is absolutely equal to voting "morals" nowadays.

Quake, how do you feel about being worshipped? I am building an altar right now, do you like chickens? Or should I sacrifice a chocolate bar? Can of Spam?

Finally, someone who understands that private property IS an issue that belongs on the moral high-ground! Ownership IS moral! Thank you!!

Regards the OP's question, it's nice to see someone at least considering the possibility of Obama losing on this forum! That's progress.

If Obie loses, I'll rip my clothes off and run around Los Angeles screaming in joy. I'll probably be mistaken for a looter and shot. You'll know it was me when you hear the media underscoring that a naked _white_ looter of Hispanic descent was shot.

G29Reload
06-06-2012, 16:42
Based on precedent, there should only be a problem if theres a disparity between the electoral college and the popular vote.

If its a replay of 2000 and Romney gets the electoral but not the popular, there will be court challenges, a move on to change the system and possibly some acts of frustration.

If its clear, no matter the disappointment there won't be any point in rioting, not that there ever is, really, but…


Usually there is a unity statement, lets unite behind the victor, etc.

I do not believe that BHO has the integrity to give a good one, and its going to be bitter vitriol and me me me if its close.

jdavionic
06-06-2012, 16:47
I expect numerous legal challenges...like this -
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/06/04/obama-threatens-florida-over-purging-non-citizen-voters/?utm_source=FrontPage+Magazine&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=b929511fe7-Mailchimp_FrontPageMag

As the challenges heat up, we won't have a response like the 'hanging chads'. This radical president has a radical following that will not peacefully fade in the shadows.

FL Airedale
06-06-2012, 16:51
I expect to dance. I haven't danced in 20 years and I sucked back then. It won't be pretty, but I will dance!

Stonewall308
06-06-2012, 18:34
Massive deregulation of the financial markets, followed by a short run up, then a massive crash that makes the Bush recession look like a mouse fart.

Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!


:upeyes:

You apparently are in a VERY small minority of people who are easily brainwashed by liberal propaganda, yet still own a gun.


The 2007 recession was precipitated by bad government regulation, not deregulation. Believe it or not, there is a strong correlation between government regulation requiring private banks to issue subprime loans to unqualified buyers, and a crisis caused by subprime loans issued to unqualified buyers.

MMII
06-06-2012, 18:46
If O gets the boot?

I think the song goes like this:


Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
My, oh my, what a wonderful day
Plenty of sunshine headin' my way
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay

Mister Bluebird's on my shoulder
It's the truth, it's actual
Ev'rything is satisfactual
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
Wonderful feeling, wonderful day, yes sir!

Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
My, oh my, what a wonderful day
Plenty of sunshine headin' my way
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay

Mister Bluebird's on my shoulder
It's the truth, it's actual
Ev'rything is satisfactual
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
Wonderful feeling, feeling this way

Mister Bluebird's on my shoulder
It is the truth, it's actual... huh?
Where is that bluebird? Mm-hm!
Ev'rything is satisfactual
Zip-a-dee-doo-dah, zip-a-dee-ay
Wonderful feeling, wonderful day!

quake
06-06-2012, 20:57
...Quake... do you like chickens? Or should I sacrifice a chocolate bar? Can of Spam?
As long as it's bacon spam, any or all of the three... :cool:


...If Obie loses, I'll rip my clothes off and run around Los Angeles screaming in joy...
I'll remember to avoid the los angeles news footage that night. :tongueout: Personally, I'd likely stay up late drinking jack & coke, smoking a domincan 5x50 and posting incoherent blatherings on glocktalk; and take the following morning off work. To paraphrase Mel Brooks, "It's good to be the boss."

(Well technically, my wife's the boss. I'm just the owner.)

cowboy1964
06-06-2012, 21:04
There ain't going to be riots in the streets. But the stock market will take off, etc. The sentiment/mood of the country, in general, will totally reverse itself from the downhill slide it's been taking.

Remember when you heard Bin Laden had been killed? The night BHO loses will be *almost* as good.

ChuteTheMall
06-06-2012, 21:43
I expect it to rain Skittles and I'll see unicorns jumping over rainbows.
:elephant:

thejellster05
06-06-2012, 21:58
You guys sure are excited to see O go. I dont like him either but Mitt's anti gun past scares me.

9mm +p+
06-06-2012, 23:59
Ha, like he's going to lose...

RatDrall
06-07-2012, 04:23
You guys sure are excited to see O go. I dont like him either but Mitt's anti gun past scares me.

Mittens will make an excellent Democrat President :rofl:

Don't worry, he, like a lot of Fudd conservatives, only favors "common sense" gun regulations :upeyes:

TangoFoxtrot
06-07-2012, 04:45
ooopppsss I thought this was the S/P forum? :upeyes:

Bren
06-07-2012, 04:57
With the recent win in WI of Scott Walker and the response to that win from the Liberal Progressives (threats, including death threats) I have to wonder what will be the response with a BHO loss in November.

I can't see things going very well in the short term after the election. I'm not trying to fear monger here just look realistically at the situation and attempt to prepare accordingly.

Ron Paul wasn't running as an indy in Wisconsin. It isn't Democrats who will win the election for Obama, it's conservatives and Republicans who vote 3rd party. There won't be an Obama loss in November because of all of those who would prefer a Republican, but who either fail to show up or cast 3rd party votes.

pugman
06-07-2012, 05:29
As far as:

goes,


This right here:

absolutely IS me voting my conscience & morals. My morals include "what's mine is mine, and what's yours is yours. I'll agree to help people out of what's mine when I can, and I'd like them to agree to not take what's mine by force".

The state our nation is in now, for an honest working person, voting "pocketbook" is absolutely equal to voting "morals" nowadays.

I get that.

You are right from a honest person's point of view what's mine is a moral issue...but is it your single driving factor when it comes to votes?

A good example is my MIL. She votes pro-life...period. She has absolutely no other stand on guns, the economy, wars, illegal immigration, etc. Its a single issue vote for her every time.

As I tell her, thankfully this vote generally falls on the Republican side of things.

This said, look at people on the dole. I know people who say they don't agree with the fact they have been getting unemployment benefits for nearly two years.....but there they are sitting at home each day.

As an accountant, I pay as little as possible in taxes. I exploit every possible tax avoidance strategy I can - I registered one of my pugs as a therapy dog for the write off (and for the record, we do visit an elderly care center weekly).

People who starve the beast are the new patriots as someone here likes to say

series1811
06-07-2012, 05:33
A gradual recovery of the economy, to start with.

quake
06-07-2012, 06:51
...You are right from a honest person's point of view what's mine is a moral issue...but is it your single driving factor when it comes to votes?
No; it's just one of the most often-abused issues lately, and the main issue that's being used to further itself, if that makes sense. Start a "haves vs. have-nots" mentality, and it feeds itself & grows, becoming almost self-perpetuating much like the race pimps have learned to do with their favorite tactic.


...People who starve the beast are the new patriots as someone here likes to say
I hadn't heard that before, but assuming that 'the beast' is an active danger to you, then it makes sense that whoever makes it weaker is at least your ally.

thesurefire
06-07-2012, 09:41
Nothing will happen. There will be no riots. Why would there be? We can either get another term of the same with Obama, or another term of basically the same with Romney. Those are our only voting options.

Even if Romney does get elected my bet is hes going to continue to perpetuate the welfare state anyway. If there was a actual conservative candidate I might feel differently but with the vast similarities between Romney and Obama I don't think this election matters much.


Really the only preparations for election day I'm considering are buying a few high cap mags and possibly some ammo with two gun grabbers on the ballot.

Now if Ron Paul won you might see some blood in the streets, looting, riots, ect, but there's just no chance of that happening.

As with every presidential election I fully plan to solidly drunk as I watch the idiot counts come in.

pugman
06-07-2012, 10:57
No; it's just one of the most often-abused issues lately, and the main issue that's being used to further itself, if that makes sense. Start a "haves vs. have-nots" mentality, and it feeds itself & grows, becoming almost self-perpetuating much like the race pimps have learned to do with their favorite tactic.



I hadn't heard that before, but assuming that 'the beast' is an active danger to you, then it makes sense that whoever makes it weaker is at least your ally.

The beast = the federal government

lawman800
06-07-2012, 11:05
Preparing for some unrest at the minimum if he loses in ultra-liberal LA. There are riots here for everything. We might just become riot central, kinda like how we became pursuit central.

I think there are enough rabid libs out here and enough entitlement class people that will make a stink or at least stir up some excuse to loot because they won't be getting as much support for freebies so they have to get that TV that night just to get by.

GRIMLET
06-07-2012, 13:00
same response if he wins. Riots, looting, and cars burned and overturned. Just like when the saints lose or win.

The New Orleans Saints?????
Their fans are not rabid animals. I have never heard of ANY problems the Saints fans have caused. After the won the Superbowl, there were thugs and soccer moms at the parade. All partying and enjoying themselves. It actually brought the city together for a while.

Now, back on point, the larger cities may have urban uprisings. I can imagine some retribution attacks ala Zimmerman.
Most likely, Obama will be reelected and nothing will happen.

Spiffums
06-07-2012, 13:15
I got my Obarry "camo" shirt ready and my metrosexual pants and my "urban" youth mask/hoddie.

quake
06-07-2012, 16:34
...I might feel differently but with the vast similarities between Romney and Obama I don't think this election matters much.
As close as they may be - and they're closer than I like by a LONG shot - I suspect that a first-term romney presidency would be very different from a second-term obama presidency. One thing I personally detest about the behavior of the current president is the constant, dishonest pandering to the masses, while on the backburner pushing his left-wing agenda thru side-channels. Understandable behavior, but if he were in a second term, he'd have no re-election concerns to factor into his actions; and that would mean the stuff that he's kept simmering on the backburner and in side-channels, can now be brought up to the front and cranked up on high. No reason for him not to, and I personally believe he's narcissistic enough to put his personal agenda ahead of his party; meaning he'd be even further left-wing than the democrat party in general. Once in a second term, with no election in the balance, he personally has nothing to lose by being the full-on raging european socialist that I believe he is at heart.

As many concerns as I have with romney, I have HUGELY more concerns with the specter of four years of obama in lame-duck mode.

...As with every presidential election I fully plan to solidly drunk as I watch the idiot counts come in.
I don't plan to get full-on stupid drunk, as I haven't done that in years; but I'll almost certainly be mellowed (Jack-medicated..?) to some degree that night. :cool:

porschedog
06-07-2012, 16:42
I'd expect massive happiness from all with an IQ higher than 56

steve1988
06-07-2012, 17:10
People who starve the beast are the new patriots as someone here likes to say

The only problem is that "the beast" doesn't care about deficit "eating." If a balanced budget or at the very least an extremely firm deficit cap was in place, then that would be a great idea, especially on a large scale.

Stevekozak
06-07-2012, 17:39
As close as they may be - and they're closer than I like by a LONG shot - I suspect that a first-term romney presidency would be very different from a second-term obama presidency. One thing I personally detest about the behavior of the current president is the constant, dishonest pandering to the masses, while on the backburner pushing his left-wing agenda thru side-channels. Understandable behavior, but if he were in a second term, he'd have no re-election concerns to factor into his actions; and that would mean the stuff that he's kept simmering on the backburner and in side-channels, can now be brought up to the front and cranked up on high. No reason for him not to, and I personally believe he's narcissistic enough to put his personal agenda ahead of his party; meaning he'd be even further left-wing than the democrat party in general. Once in a second term, with no election in the balance, he personally has nothing to lose by being the full-on raging european socialist that I believe he is at heart.

As many concerns as I have with romney, I have HUGELY more concerns with the specter of four years of obama in lame-duck mode.


I don't plan to get full-on stupid drunk, as I haven't done that in years; but I'll almost certainly be mellowed (Jack-medicated..?) to some degree that night. :cool:
This is pretty much how I feel about the subject as well. Subsitute Powers Irish Whiskey for the Jack and we might be twins. :)

UneasyRider
06-07-2012, 18:52
I expect a Republican sweep of all 3.

The most important thing about getting Obama out of office is that the next president could possibly appoint 2 or 3 Supreme Court justices and will change the future path of our country for a generation.

No matter who gets elected... we're broke... so who makes the decisions about what gets cut is going to be really important.

Frankly, Romney has experience in this area and republicans in general are the party of normal people with jobs (no offense to any Obama fans), I often say that "I am a white, Christian, straight, gun owner with a job, how could I vote democrat." Now I work with a guy (and we are friends) who is a white, pot smoking, athiest, anti gun, pro gay (married but says if his son came home with a guy it would be ok), why would he NOT vote democrat.

lawman800
06-07-2012, 20:03
Most likely, Obama will be reelected and nothing will happen.

Negative.

You never seen "celebratory" riots when good things happen? When the Lakers won some games, the fans rioted through downtown LA, burned police cars, and looted like it was going out of fashion.

Then with the 2008 elections, you immediately saw the bad behavior with the crowd who thought they were untouchable. Riots in the name of celebrations and everytime one of them got jammed up, they threw out that the police can't touch them anymore because Obama is in charge. That mentality has not gone anywhere.

If he wins 2012, expect worse.

GRIMLET
06-07-2012, 20:12
You might be right.

ChuteTheMall
06-07-2012, 20:12
Win or lose, I'm planning to riot like it's 1968.
Stocking up on Skittles & canned ice tea.
:devildance::bluesbrothers::elephant::dancingbanana::dancing::broccoli:

SPIN2010
06-07-2012, 20:26
Four more years of a complete idiot to complain about. :supergrin:

lawman800
06-07-2012, 20:27
With a second term, he will either be totally out of control or he will temper it a bit and hope to get the term limit repealed and serve indefinitely like FDR until his death.

Bolster
06-07-2012, 21:07
Most likely, Obama will be reelected and nothing will happen.

World events have not been turning up roses for BO recently, if you hadn't noticed. He's trying desperately to get away from the economy as an issue, but the economy keeps sucking.

So he's tried war on women (yawn)
Drone killed yet another AlQ #2 (how many #2s are there? yawn)
The 99% against the 1% (who actually makes the jobs) no sale

...and there will be other distractions, but the economy keeps sitting on BO's chest and thumpin him. And for good reason. Under most any other president the recession would be well into the rear view mirror. BO just keeps finding ways of making it worse.

Now if he was able to keep his union buds safe, then maybe...but then Walker came along and cleaned his clock.

So, not a good time to be BO.

But I agree that "nothing happening" is most likely, as far as largescale riots are concerned.

Aceman
06-07-2012, 21:27
I think one of the most fascinating things about our country is how weak a president can be. Yet despite that, both parties manage to ruin *cough* run it through congress, and into the ground. Yet people still point the head of beast like the claws and tail aren't just as dangerous....and it grows a new head regardless.

I am DONE with Republicans and Democrats. What will happen is same crap different day.

And the people who say "Well you are throwing your vote away if you don't pick one" They have ALREADY been owned. You are just as much an enemy, or even more so. You have asceeded that THEY will rule our country and YOU will do nothing about it.

If I am THEM - I would be sitting in my big leather lobbyist paid for chair laughing my @$$ off as the extremes fight each other over crap that nobody really cares about. Abortion, Guns, Immigration, Who they dated, Religion? No money for politicians in those things.

Aceman
06-07-2012, 21:38
republicans in general are the party of normal people

No politicians at that level are the "party" of normal people. Both parties have became the "parties of themselves"

There main goal is to make YOU think that you are in the right and everyone else is wrong. And they do a good job of it.

Not one candidate will lay out the top issues, specify why it's an issue, the causes, what needs done to fix it, and describe at even a high level how it can be achieved. Yet people will select one of these guys to run the country. A board of Directors would can a CEO in a New York minute for slinging BS the way we allow the leader of our country to. And the people are mostly to ignorant to know they said nothing.

And they are owned by big businesses. And the way you stay in the 1% is by paying them to make sure you DON'T pay your fair share of taxes. And the way you keep the other 99% isn't by giving to people who want to work hard for minimum wage. It's by shopping out the work to foreign countries and illegal immigrants. Not one of these guys will say that the border is getting closed, business is coming hoem, and the tax laws are being cleaned up. Businesses won't ALLOW Repubs or Dems to do that.

And neither group of wahoos can fix it now.

Here is a little trick you try with koolaid: Put some black food dye in it. Guess what? You can't tell the difference between the flavors. Blue, red, doesn't matter. It's all berry flavored crap and artificial poison.

But you keep telling yourself that it's all good. It's been going downhill for a long time across both groups. Tell me why either of the talking heads behind the podium will change anything.

thesurefire
06-07-2012, 23:35
No politicians at that level are the "party" of normal people. Both parties have became the "parties of themselves"

And the people are mostly to ignorant to know they said nothing.

And they are owned by big businesses...

And neither group of wahoos can fix it now.

It's all berry flavored crap and artificial poison.

But you keep telling yourself that it's all good. It's been going downhill for a long time across both groups. Tell me why either of the talking heads behind the podium will change anything.

Lot of good points here... Trying not to stray too far from S&P and into politics I think people need to take a good hard look at both parties 50 years ago, even 20 years ago, and then those parties today. We're on the fast track for having only political party and the implications of that need to be examined.

The concern that Obama has been mellow if you will to try and appeal to a large voter base for the coming election is a valid one, however The most valid concern being that the next president will appoint probably 1 and likely 2 supreme court judges. This actually does factor in a large way to S&P. Do you want judges ruling its insane to keep more than 1 month of food and water? Being "insane" already allows people to take your guns.

Honestly my biggest concern with Obama being reelected is an attack on self sufficiency, based on the socialist logical of "the government is here to help" in any natural disaster, loss of a job, health problem, company you work for going bankrupt, the list goes on. This clearly clashes with the S&P logic of "prepare for the worst" when an entity demands reliance.

The issue with Romney is He's just a step away from Obama towards moderate, and that step sure doesn't seem like much when its apparent, by the economy, unemployment, national debt, our failed wars, bailouts, nationalized healthcare, ect, that you need to be at a full on sprint in the opposite direction.

I think most people realize that, and that's why I'll stand by my prediction that either Romney or Obama, it doesn't really matter. The economy will continue to decline, the welfare checks will keep pouring out in increased numbers, and the masses of the nation will watch American idol on their government sponsored new 72 inch flat screen.

Take a important step towards preparing for the future, think very hard about what you want that future to look like, and then vote accordingly.

kirgi08
06-08-2012, 00:54
The upcoming election has us in a purchase mode.If the one wins my decisions thread will become a reality.If not,we got more preps ta store.'08.

UneasyRider
06-08-2012, 05:33
Aceman the reason that politicians can't talk about the real economic issues is simple, there is no mathmatical cure for the mess that we are in. We could elect Ron Paul himself and given the option of bringing down the economy today or letting the snowball roll down the hill and get bigger, he would choose to wait if he were governing... just like Obama did.

Reality causes people to make different decisions than theory does. What we need to do is have a plan to cut government spending for the day that people realize that we don't have any money to pay them back and all that we can offer is colored paper and inflation.

Bren
06-08-2012, 06:03
Aceman the reason that politicians can't talk about the real economic issues is simple, there is no mathmatical cure for the mess that we are in. We could elect Ron Paul himself and given the option of bringing down the economy today or letting the snowball roll down the hill and get bigger, he would choose to wait if he were governing... just like Obama did.

Reality causes people to make different decisions than theory does. What we need to do is have a plan to cut government spending for the day that people realize that we don't have any money to pay them back and all that we can offer is colored paper and inflation.

That's because "reality" is about impressing voters who don't/won't understand economics, while theory is about fixing the problem. There is, most certainly, a mathematical answer. You even stated a simple version of it in your post.

UneasyRider
06-08-2012, 06:25
That's because "reality" is about impressing voters who don't/won't understand economics, while theory is about fixing the problem. There is, most certainly, a mathematical answer. You even stated a simple version of it in your post.

Take my test then if you think that there is an answer:

Spending = 3.6T
Taxes = 2.3T
Interest = .5T
Balance =1.8T

National Debt =16T
Unfunded Entitlement Debt = 80-120T


So how exactly would we pay off these debts on our 1.8 Trillion dollars per year AND run the current government which is spending twice that amount per year?

NO mathmatical way to do it my friend. The inevitable conclusion is that we are Greece plus.

UneasyRider
06-08-2012, 06:32
I have to add that interest rates are less than 2% and when they rise, in a free market they are 3-4% greater than the inflation rate (oh boy), to a very resonable number historically of say 6 or 8% we will be spending all of our taxes on interest and printing our spending money.

No solution but inflation.

GRIMLET
06-08-2012, 07:27
Aceman is my new GT hero!

WolfNotSheep
06-08-2012, 10:58
As I watch Obama get fired I think I'll enact one of my favorite Denis Leary quotes...

"I'm the kinda guy that likes to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of barbecue ribs with the side-order of gravy fries?" I want high cholesterol! I wanna eat bacon, and butter, and buckets of cheese, okay?! I wanna smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinnati in the non-smoking section! I wanna run naked through the street, with green Jell-O all over my body, reading Playboy magazine."

WolfNotSheep
06-08-2012, 10:59
...maybe I'll skip the Jell-O part, on second thought.

mac66
06-08-2012, 18:24
You guys sure are excited to see O go. I dont like him either but Mitt's anti gun past scares me.

Even Obama isn't stupid enough to jump on the anti-gun bandwagon and Romney is much smarter than Obama.

TACLOAD
06-08-2012, 19:23
ooopppsss I thought this was the S/P forum? :upeyes:

Me too. Guess forums got crossed.

TACLOAD
06-08-2012, 19:26
The New Orleans Saints?????
Their fans are not rabid animals. I have never heard of ANY problems the Saints fans have caused. After the won the Superbowl, there were thugs and soccer moms at the parade. All partying and enjoying themselves. It actually brought the city together for a while.

Now, back on point, the larger cities may have urban uprisings. I can imagine some retribution attacks ala Zimmerman.
Most likely, Obama will be reelected and nothing will happen.

I think he was trying to insinuate something else GRIMLET. I see through it though.

DoctaGlockta
06-08-2012, 20:40
Me too. Guess forums got crossed.

Ask an early 90's LA Korean shop owner what happens when a certain minority group thinks they are getting the shaft when things don't go their way.

lawman800
06-08-2012, 21:02
Ask an early 90's LA Korean shop owner what happens when a certain minority group thinks they are getting the shaft when things don't go their way.

I'm sure some would love talking to you but they are dead from unnatural causes.

TACLOAD
06-08-2012, 21:27
Ask an early 90's LA Korean shop owner what happens when a certain minority group thinks they are getting the shaft when things don't go their way.

I have. My wife happens to be Korean with family there. Guess I'm part of that minority group. :whistling:

TangoFoxtrot
06-09-2012, 05:04
I have. My wife happens to be Korean with family there. Guess I'm part of that minority group. :whistling:

Hey Tacload isn't funny how some people just get diarrhea of the mouth? :rofl:

TACLOAD
06-09-2012, 06:44
Hey Tacload isn't funny how some people just get diarrhea of the mouth? :rofl:

Yes it is.:cool:

Stevekozak
06-09-2012, 07:39
I am not sure what this thread has spun to, but in terms of the original post ( ie the recent posts by Dockta , TF, Lawman, and Tacload, feel like I am missing out on something there) , I expect me personally to be at least a little more hopeful for the country's immediate future. I don't think much of anything will be happening in terms of riots or civil unrest, unless BHO stirs it up, which is entirely possible. I am going to hold my breath until he is actually out of office, as I suspect he will be one nasty lame duck.

DoctaGlockta
06-09-2012, 17:18
I have. My wife happens to be Korean with family there. Guess I'm part of that minority group. :whistling:

So ask your family how well they were prepared when the Rodney King verdict came down. Many of the news bites I saw showed shop keepers defending their businesses quite well. I see a BHO loss possibly igniting the same trouble in certain urban areas. Hence the posting of this topic.

TACLOAD
06-09-2012, 18:38
Yes they were defending their property, but it was not just 1 ethnic group. Lots of opportunist were there too. Of course all we saw was what the news wanted us to see. Not all the businesses were targeted. I feel some people in certain areas saw this as an opportunity to settle some scores on the immirgrants as a whole.
Now what's funny is how Koreans in Korea viewed this. It didn't sit to well with most of them. They saw this as an embarrassment because it was being broadcast worldwide. Years of study have went into what happened and why it did in that area.
Most of it was a misunderstanding of cultures. One example, is Koreans placing your change on the counter instead of in your hand. Most Americans might see this as an insult, but to older Koreans its an insult to touch someone without their permission. I lived in Korea for 3 years and saw this firsthand. I also saw it while visiting Koreatown when I lived in SoCal. This rarely happens anymore.
Some people felt the Koreans were not contributing to the neighborhood and only taking from the people. They stayed to themselves and for the most part only had family working at the store. To me that made good business sense because overhead was low. Other saw it as shunning the people they served.
The language barrier didn't help either. English is very hard for older koreans to learn, so most chose not too. What a lot of residents saw were people who wanted to reap the benifits of living in America but didn't want to assimilate into the culture. All the business owners lived in other neighborhoods but did business in poorer neighborhoods because property was way cheaper. Hell, i would have too! Lots of social issues lead up the incidents in the 90's.

Bolster
06-09-2012, 21:35
In November I'll regularly be driving the 110 corridor, which goes directly through the major Obama voting bloc here in LA. So naturally I want to believe that there will be no trouble, and that everyone will be as polite as pie.

If not, I'll be your man on the ground, either figuratively, or literally.

PlasticGuy
06-10-2012, 09:40
BHO will win.

lawman800
06-10-2012, 09:45
BHO will win.

Not without a lot of shenanigans and turmoil and outright cheating by the libs... which is to say, whether or not he will win anyway, the libs will be pulling their stunts because that is just how it will go down.

BHO can be leading the polls by a 3 to 1 margin and they will still pull the same stunts, sometimes just to create disturbances, and others to just make sure it is 100% sealed.

Bolster
06-10-2012, 09:59
...leading the polls ....

... which have been thoroughly compromised, because the left controls most of the polling.

Scott Walker was "supposed" to lose, based on exit polling.
John Kerry was "supposed" to win, based on exit polling.

"Exit polling" is now a last ditch effort to demoralize non-socialist voters.

cowboywannabe
06-10-2012, 10:31
if BHO loses i can say that for the first time in my life im proud of my country....if that line hasnt already been taken.

kirgi08
06-10-2012, 10:49
:impatient: :tongueout:

Aceman
06-10-2012, 11:22
Aceman the reason that politicians can't talk about the real economic issues is simple, there is no mathmatical cure for the mess that we are in. We could elect Ron Paul himself and given the option of bringing down the economy today or letting the snowball roll down the hill and get bigger, he would choose to wait if he were governing... just like Obama did.

Reality causes people to make different decisions than theory does. What we need to do is have a plan to cut government spending for the day that people realize that we don't have any money to pay them back and all that we can offer is colored paper and inflation.

Very good points Uneasy. I'll disagree with you in part, however...

I am a consultant by trade (Lean, Six Sigma, Advanced Analytics, etc...)

The economy of a Nation is an EXTREMELY complex problem. And even the simplest problems I have worked on ALWAYS have a few things in common:
#1 There is ALWAYS more than one cause.
- Politicians like to appeal to the one cause approach though. If they hit your hot button, they get your vote.
#2 Each cause OFTEN requires multiple solutions to eliminate it.
- If there are three major causes, I need maybe nine specific solutions that will address all of the aspects of the problem.
#3 The math is NEVER everything (but it's the first thing!).
- At some point you need to make decisions based on values. especially when the solutions are equally painful.
#4 we only move forward with CONSENSUS.
-At the end of the day you don't need to agree with everything, but you need to be willing to support it.

Until someone is willing to list all the symptoms and their causes, then identify all the solutions/changes necessary, and everyone pull together to support it, progress will be slow, painful, or ineffective.

If I saw a group like Congress managing a company, I'd recommend that maybe some small percentage be kept, the rest be tossed. Impose martial law or you will never get out of it. Too many people working for their own benefit, and working against the others, all resulting in things that are not in the organizations best interest.

There are solutions. They are all VERY unpleasant. even saying them will get you unelected and implementing them will get you unsupported.

I can't tell you how many people I have met that try to cheat reality. I can do a lot but I can't work miracles. At some point you need to choose between bad and really bad. And the difference is often how quickly you choose bad. Time almost always just makes things worse.

The Parties do NOT:
* State ALL the causes of the problems in the system, or even legitimate ones
* State the collective solutions necessary to make the solutions reality/effective
* Make consensus decisions fully supported to be effective
* Posses the same values as each other, or most of us, for that matter

I don't care which one you pick. They look and act like two different kinds of retards once you strip the BS away. I've seen better run McDonalds at this point.

But they are brilliant in a sense. Look at the posts here - you believe one of those groups is really making decisions in your best interest or your concern.

Aceman
06-10-2012, 11:29
Here is the S&P spin out of this:

#1 Identify clear problems
#2 Identify what is causing it
#3 Generate multiple solutions and pick the best
#4 When all the solutions suck, pick one NOW based on your values.

Work together or you won't survive.

kirgi08
06-10-2012, 11:45
Or go ghost,viable option.'08.

bdcochran
06-10-2012, 12:04
Doesn't matter whether he wins or loses.

There are very few roles to play in this world - victim, hero, enabler, jock, bread winner.

Most people chose the role of victim - everything bad happens because of conspiracies, hatred of the person's color, creed, ancestors, religion, height, weight, lack of formal education.

So, the excuses for rioting, *****ing, not doing anything positive remain no matter what happens in the election.

If people on this forum concentrate of getting their meds in order and exercising, they are the best things that they can do -whether BHO is re-elected or not.

Ruble Noon
06-10-2012, 13:30
What you should be asking is what to expect with a BHO win.

Catshooter
06-10-2012, 15:23
Aceman's is probably the most intelligent posting I have ever seen on GlockTalk. Including mine. :)

Ruble Noon,

That's what I did. And like Aceman has pointed out the answers range from unpleasant to downright ugly. But I'm doing my best to be as ready as I can get.

You guys all know that the real answer to all of this nations problems is to make me Emperor, right? :)


Cat

Bolster
06-10-2012, 18:00
Look at the posts here - you believe one of those groups is really making decisions in your best interest or your concern.

Interesting post! I agree with several of your points. You truly have an cynical elitist's view, as befits a consultant.

You use lots of business analogies, comparing government against a well-run business. (And I agree with that analogy.) Do you see no difference between the parties as to which would be more likely to run government like a business, and which more likely to run it like a charity, or a cult?

Regards the last line, what I believe is: one of our two political groups consistently makes decisions that are intended to harm me, a private sector entrepreneur. And lots of evidence to back that up. The other of these two groups sometimes makes decisions that harm me, but generally is more sympathetic to the host than to the parasites.

We're not all simpletons out here. Some of us know which side our bread's buttered; we know which pedal is the accelerator and which is the brake.

It's time to get off the brakes.

GRIMLET
06-10-2012, 19:35
As long as your side stays buttered we are all happy. Enjoy the fat.

Most Americans have no butter, from either party. We don't fit into their propaganda.

Bolster
06-10-2012, 20:29
As long as your side stays buttered we are all happy. Enjoy the fat..

I must have been terribly unclear; I've had no "butter" (meaning, extra cash) going on almost 4 years. The last few years have been incredibly lean; I am not enjoying any fat (pocket change) whatsoever. I don't belong to either major party. But I know which party does me the most harm, and wishes me ill. I know that one party is filled with people that despise independent entrepreneurs such as myself.

Most Americans have no butter, from either party. We don't fit into their propaganda.

Not sure I understand your meaning; these have been fat years for unions and public sector, which is only now starting to unravel. Private sector takes it first and hardest; if it's really bad, eventually the public sector takes it too.* But if you are saying there's more (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends) independents than R or D, recent numbers are:

D: 34%
R: 36%
I: 31%

As of 2010, there were more D than R.

Something's changing.

*Apologies to Quake who takes exception to these terms.

GRIMLET
06-10-2012, 20:59
I must have been terribly unclear; I've had no "butter" going on almost 4 years. The last few years have been incredibly lean. I don't belong to either major party. But I know which party does me the most harm, and wishes me ill. I know that one party is filled with people that despise independent entrepreneurs such as myself.



Not sure I understand your meaning; these have been fat years for unions and public sector. But if you are saying there's more (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/partisan_trends) independents than R or D:

D: 34%
R: 36%
I: 31%

Lets breathe and release.

If one knows which side HIS bread is buttered on and he is on that side, is he out for himself or the country? That is a question for rich/poor tycoon/hood rat.

Im not a business person. I will take your word that your political leaning is better for you to run your business.

The fat comment comes from butter. Its a word play.

Please don't post polls. They are one sided for the repubs or dems. The average American has no chance to form true independent thought of ideas. Both parties have their merits and their downfalls.
The mass media is alienating one group from the other. As long as both parties stay hardline and against cooperation of any type, America will not regain its economic advantage.

There is no anger in this post, only dissapointment in our leaders.

lawman800
06-11-2012, 03:26
Both parties are full of hypocrites and I have no illusion of their self-interest but one party is openly hostile to my freedoms while trying to tax me more for their charities and social engineering. The other one does a lot of the same but generally promotes more business freedom and general independence of the citizenry without a nanny state.

Which party really makes a bigger difference in my life? Hopefully none. The government really should not be too much of a part of my life, that is the Founder Fathers' intent.

As for public sector and private sector comparisons, you can't say one or the other always suffer. What really happens is that both are cyclical and one generally lags the other by a few years but they are so interrelated that you can't help it.

When private businesses suffer, tax revenues and spending start slowing, the public sector starts feeling it in a year or two from the shrinking private sector.

In the 80's, money was good, people didn't flock to the public sector. Late 80's, with the real estate crash, people went to the public sector. In the 90's with the internet boom, it was the same way, public sector hiring went to the toilet to find some people to fill the spots. When the economy started shrinking in the late 2000's and now, the public sector is seen as being too fat because the private sector is shrinking while the public sector is lagging in reaction time. But it is catching up. Government downsizing and layoffs are continuing while the private sector is rebounding a bit. It all works out in the end the same way.

Bolster
06-11-2012, 15:17
Lets breathe and release.

I thought it was 'catch and release.'

If one knows which side HIS bread is buttered on and he is on that side, is he out for himself or the country? That is a question for rich/poor tycoon/hood rat.

You make it sound as if supporting any particular form of government is antithetical to the good of the country. I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried. Some policies keep the country moving forward. Some stop it dead in its tracks. Some are designed to turn us into a third-world country. As citizens in a democracy it's our duty to discern a difference, and to judge good from bad.

Please don't post polls. They are one sided for the repubs or dems.

Please don't tell me what to post and what not to post. If you don't like the poll, you're free to challenge it or ignore it. Rasmussen isn't a fly-by-night organization; their previous polls gave the advantage to the Ds not the Rs; now the shoe is on the other foot as people leave the Ds to become Rs. Why might that be happening? While the poll may be disappointing to you, it doesn't make it invalid.

That said, there is no anger in this post either. Concern, perhaps mild alarm at the refusal to discern a difference in governance and its consequences, but no anger.

Crawling into our shells and saying "to hell with all of them" doesn't get us out of the mess either. And we are, my friend, in one big f'n mess. Started long before OB, but he definitely hasn't helped any.

Are we so shot as a country, that we can't roll up our sleeves and say, "Let's get this fixed"? "Let's revoke the driver's license and pull this car out of the ditch?" What would our ancestors think of us if we were to just wilt and withdraw?

TACLOAD
06-11-2012, 16:07
7 fat years, 7 lean years.

Ruble Noon
06-11-2012, 16:16
I thought it was 'catch and release.'



You make it sound as if supporting any particular form of government is antithetical to the good of the country. I couldn't disagree with you more if I tried. Some policies keep the country moving forward. Some stop it dead in its tracks. Some are designed to turn us into a third-world country. As citizens in a democracy it's our duty to discern a difference, and to judge good from bad.



Please don't tell me what to post and what not to post. If you don't like the poll, you're free to challenge it or ignore it. Rasmussen isn't a fly-by-night organization; their previous polls gave the advantage to the Ds not the Rs; now the shoe is on the other foot as people leave the Ds to become Rs. Why might that be happening? While the poll may be disappointing to you, it doesn't make it invalid.

That said, there is no anger in this post either. Concern, perhaps mild alarm at the refusal to discern a difference in governance and its consequences, but no anger.

Crawling into our shells and saying "to hell with all of them" doesn't get us out of the mess either. And we are, my friend, in one big f'n mess. Started long before OB, but he definitely hasn't helped any.

Are we so shot as a country, that we can't roll up our sleeves and say, "Let's get this fixed"? "Let's revoke the driver's license and pull this car out of the ditch?" What would our ancestors think of us if we were to just wilt and withdraw?

Yes. As long as it's us vs. them as evidenced in this thread, our situation is unfix-able. The idea that one party cares about us more than the other is laughable. They are two sides of the same coin. Oh yeah, they each have their planks to keep their flock faithfully voting for them but, when it comes down to expanding the government or its power they are in lockstep with each other. Hell, Lindsay Grahm and John McCain about had an orgasm over the passage of a law allowing the indefinite detainment of Americans. Look how the left decried the Un-patriot act yet when they had a chance to repeal it, they renewed it with the full blessing of the republicans. Nope, there is no shortage of bipartisanship when it comes to stealing the rights or the money of the American people.

Aceman
06-11-2012, 16:40
Interesting post! I agree with several of your points. You truly have an cynical elitist's view, as befits a consultant.

Cynical? I prefer to think of it as experienced, skilled, data driven, and ultra pragmatic. AKA, Keepin' it real. I get payed to be right, not to blow sunshine up peoples @$$.

You use lots of business analogies, comparing government against a well-run business. (And I agree with that analogy.)

I am also a Lead Exainer for a Baldrige Quality program - Well run is well run....Midway catalog, School, Bank, or Gov agency.


Do you see no difference between the parties as to which would be more likely to run government like a business, and which more likely to run it like a charity, or a cult?

I hear what you are saying - but I disagree. Both have become so entrenched in their own Dogma, the choose a philosophy over fact. And both are equally influenced by the almighty dollar. They just get dollars from different people.


It's time to get off the brakes.

And that's exactly how we got here. One just puts on the brakes yet revs the engine like gas is free. The other owns a gas station and drives way too fast for the conditions like the gas won't run out. And they are both in the drivers seat, and don't care where they are going as long as they take everyone along, or not, or pay for the gas or don't, or drive too slow or too fast....

Time for a REAL change - not status quo in vanilla or chocolate. Still Ice cream, still fattening, still rots your teeth, still not healthy.

Bolster
06-11-2012, 16:56
I hear what you are saying - but I disagree. Both have become so entrenched in their own Dogma, the choose a philosophy over fact. And both are equally influenced by the almighty dollar. They just get dollars from different people.

Fair enough!! Good answer IMO. You and I may share a concern over how ideology is affecting every reach and corner of society. Perhaps you believe as I do that empiricism (what works, based on repeated observations) rather than ideology (what should work, according to doctrine) is the way up.

The idea that one party cares about us more than the other is laughable.

Yeah, it's too bad we judge them on caring, isn't it. I judge them on harming me, which is the flip side of that. I'd prefer both parties would leave me the hell alone, and not "care" for me at all, if you take my meaning. I don't feel I need a party's "care," but I'll not turn down one party's protection, if the other party is attacking me, my lifestyle, and my values of wanting to live independent and free.

pilsbury
06-11-2012, 18:20
I expect to have a little more take home pay in my wallet.

Catshooter
06-11-2012, 18:27
Seriously? Why if I might ask?


Cat

Carry16
06-11-2012, 20:39
please, get it right..... "paid" not payed :wavey:

I get payed to be right, not to blow sunshine up peoples @$$.

lawman800
06-11-2012, 22:40
Maybe where he works, he gets payed.

bdcochran
06-23-2012, 02:41
http://www.270towin.com/

lawman800
06-23-2012, 11:12
I had FL as the swing state... again... wow... tight voting.

My prediction Romney 260/Obama 249, without FL's 29 votes. That one state is the determining factor.

quake
06-23-2012, 19:00
...these have been fat years for unions and public sector, which is only now starting to unravel. Private sector takes it first and hardest; if it's really bad, eventually the public sector takes it too.*

... *Apologies to Quake who takes exception to these terms.

Didn't notice this before; no apologies necessary. "Public sector", "public property", etc., are common & denotatively correct usage; I just don't like the touchy-feely connotation they've taken on.

Technically, "public property" is synonymous with "government-owned property"; and is the opposite of "private property", which is one of the precepts that founded this country. Similarly, the term "public sector" jobs is synonymous with "government jobs", and could be correctly used interchangeably; yet 'government jobs' is never used in news broadcasts. Never.

Denotative (dictionary) meaning is identical, yet to never have one of the two valid statements used simply demonstrates that it's the connotative (feeling) that matters to those using & choosing the terms.

And when feelings determine the direction and content of the discussion, logic is doomed from the outset.

kirgi08
06-23-2012, 19:33
Private property is government "owned" also.'08.

quake
06-23-2012, 19:36
Private property is government "owned" also.'08.

Unfortunately true now; but wasn't always the case. Unfettered property rights was a huge thing with the revolutionaries of the 1700's, and for a good while we did have such a thing.

But no more. Sadly, you're right about that.

Adamz04
06-23-2012, 21:18
As close as they may be - and they're closer than I like by a LONG shot - I suspect that a first-term romney presidency would be very different from a second-term obama presidency. One thing I personally detest about the behavior of the current president is the constant, dishonest pandering to the masses, while on the backburner pushing his left-wing agenda thru side-channels. Understandable behavior, but if he were in a second term, he'd have no re-election concerns to factor into his actions; and that would mean the stuff that he's kept simmering on the backburner and in side-channels, can now be brought up to the front and cranked up on high. No reason for him not to, and I personally believe he's narcissistic enough to put his personal agenda ahead of his party; meaning he'd be even further left-wing than the democrat party in general. Once in a second term, with no election in the balance, he personally has nothing to lose by being the full-on raging european socialist that I believe he is at heart.

As many concerns as I have with romney, I have HUGELY more concerns with the specter of four years of obama in lame-duck mode.


I don't plan to get full-on stupid drunk, as I haven't done that in years; but I'll almost certainly be mellowed (Jack-medicated..?) to some degree that night. :cool:

Bingo.
Im horrified by the number of people who claim that Romney is just like Obama so it doesnt matter. It does matter. Do your homework.
Ill agree there is less of a difference between say your typical R and D, but Obama is a whole different story. He is not your typical D.
If Romney doesnt win by a landslide, which he has to because of democratic voter fraud, and wins by a margin there will certainly be chaos and riots.
If Obama wins I expect nothing except further decline of our great nation.

Bolster
06-24-2012, 00:21
http://www.270towin.com/

Way to early to predict. Sabato himself, the professor who runs the above website, recently (June 21) said:

"Now that it appears that the presumptive Republican presidential nominee has a fair chance to defeat President Barack Obama — a development that seems to have genuinely surprised many Republicans, perhaps including some of those big names who declined to run themselves — Romney does not need a big-name, attention-grabbing running mate to help him win this race. He just needs someone who won’t cause him headaches."

(BTW, were you aware that Sabato predicts wins for losing candidates who pay him enough money?)

emt1581
06-24-2012, 17:53
I think you will have some rioting, but in the same areas where they riot for fun anytime there is an event to attach it to (wins, losses, racial tensions, etc.).

I'm not so sure he will lose though. I mean, I'm waiting for these debates. He is quite a charismatic speaker and people like that. When it comes down to it, Romney better be REAL good with comebacks and persuasion when he goes up against King O on tv. Scandels don't seem to work any more. I think the debates will be where the election is won/lost.

But if King O loses....I dunno...can't claim racism because the guy was already in office. Probably uproar and recount demands. I don't see mass chaos and societal breakdown.

-Emt1581

lawman800
06-24-2012, 19:46
But if King O loses....I dunno...can't claim racism because the guy was already in office.

Of course they can. Libs can see racism anywhere and everywhere.

They see racism in pool where the "white" ball has to hit the "black" ball into the pocket for the win. They see it in the number of white jelly beans versus black licorice jelly beans in a bag. They see it in Westerns where the good guys wear "white" and the bad guys wear "black".

There are tons more examples but those are ones that I recall hearing in debates or rants.

The claim will be that we couldn't overcome our collective racism to have another 4 years of having a half black President in charge of the country and the racists (which is everyone who didn't vote for the Obaminator) pulled every dirty trick and used all the rhetoric and dumped tons of racist money to beat the one true messiah of the left.

Nevermind that the Obaminator couldn't do anything to save this country by pushing his leftist big government collectivist agenda which has failed in every country in the world. No, if you disagree with him, you are a racist, clear and simple.

Hummerbike
06-27-2012, 09:30
In his last couple of months expect to see lots of Executive Orders and pardons.

John Rambo
06-27-2012, 09:41
With the recent win in WI of Scott Walker and the response to that win from the Liberal Progressives (threats, including death threats) I have to wonder what will be the response with a BHO loss in November.

I can't see things going very well in the short term after the election. I'm not trying to fear monger here just look realistically at the situation and attempt to prepare accordingly.

Isolated riots in the parts of America that always riot. Some hurt feelings. Talking heads saying how its a victory for America, and then the other side saying how its a travesty and we should be rebelling. Then Ronmey gets sworn in without incident and shows us hes every bit as bad as Obama was.

Rinse and repeat in 2016. This election is a bust for America.

paratrooper
06-27-2012, 10:53
You guys sure are excited to see O go. I dont like him either but Mitt's anti gun past scares me.

GW Bush supported the 1994 AWB and that didn't stop his election

codecowboy
06-27-2012, 23:03
Real wrath of God type stuff. Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling! Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes. The dead rising from the grave! Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!

lawman800
06-28-2012, 03:39
In his last couple of months expect to see lots of Executive Orders and pardons.

Isn't that par for the course?

jlavallee
06-28-2012, 18:48
Anyone thick enough to believe Romney will be any different is part of the problem. We'll almost surely get one of those two and we'll get the big government shaft like always.

Until we educate people about the fact that nobody has the right to force their views on anyone else, we continue to loose. You don't have to agree with the views of your government. You are supposed to ensure they remain limited in power to force the government views on anyone. The right wingers on here are just as damn ignorant as the lefties.

squirreld
06-28-2012, 20:22
GW Bush supported the 1994 AWB and that didn't stop his election

GWB said he would sign any legislation on the matter that was sent to his desk knowing darn well that such legislation would never cross his desk.

Have to read between the lines.