Elections thread

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 2:11 pm

Hmmm interesting.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Health_Car ... H2-wVFWWSo

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:31 pm

http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

info on Romney's and Ryan's tax cut plan.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 6:43 pm

"Romney-like" is a scare tactic that the Libs are pushing at the American voters. It has been made a fact that no-one knows exactly what the Romney/Ryan health care plan will do. They first will have to get Obamacare repealed before they can do anything.

Watching the debate tonight while I record it on three other networks - MSNBC, CNN, and Foc News Network. Looking forward to how Obama handles any of the questions pertaining to the Libya situation without going into panic mode. The American public was fed no less than 11 cover-up stories over the seven-day period before Obama finally admitted, and changed his stance, that it was a terrorist attack. But then he turns around and says we have Al Queda on their heals. Then if htat is the case, why do we have Al Queda flags flying over the Four American Embassies that were attacked in that short period of time. I hope Romney pushes him to explain that remark.

With Christine Lamb testifying that she listend to the whole 6-hour firefight in the Libyan Embassy that resulted in the deaths of four Americans.

And just about an hour ago it was made public by the news networks that A123, which makes lithium batteries for alternative energy automobiles, a Green company that Obama gave a shocking $230 million of our tax dollars because they were hiring people who were looking for work in that part of energy resources. Now they have laid off over 350 and filed for Chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection. How will Obama explained this tonight, when Romney counters any Bain attacks from the President?

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Tue Oct 16, 2012 9:54 pm

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 6:44 am

Here we go. Romney - 2: Obama - 0

I am rewatching the Debate again, and will further expound on the truths that came out so vividly last night. Obama hates being called a liar, and when it is the truth and backed up by truths, Obama has no record to run on. He has so many fajlures that it isn't a wonder he would like to run away and hide somewhere until this is all over.

And now CNN even admits the Crowley was wrong and Obama didn't use the word 'terrorist' in his remarks on September 12, 2012. Read this:

http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles ... rowley.htm

Obama tried taking a page out of the "Biden Book of Rudeness" and tried to be more forceful last night and failed very miserably.

We have one more debate to go and it is on Monday night, eight days before the election. And the subject for the debate will be 'Foreign Policy', of which Obama's is in real trouble, and we will hear what Romney's vision for the future is.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 8:52 am

Just saw this billboard at a major intersection in Wichita ----

We Built It!............You Broke It!..........We Will Fix It!!!

On November 6th PRESIDENT OBAMA - YOU ARE FIRED!!!!!!

Also here is some neutral news on the debate last night:

http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles ... rowley.htm

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:01 am

When you are done throwing your rocks at me, you must read this. Probably the best description of last night's debate:

http://www.caintv.com/ObamaMorefeistype ... tjusta-584

I believe everything that is said in this article is probably as straight-forward as you can get in its description of what went on.

PatrickvD · Post by **PatrickvD** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:37 am

dvdjunkie wrote:Here we go. Romney - 2: Obama - 0

Yes. Sure....

DisneyAnimation88 · Post by **DisneyAnimation88** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 9:41 am

I've rewatched the debate twice since last night and personally I think Obama claimed the victory, though it was probably not as decisive as he hoped it would be. Once again Romney talked the talk and said all of the things he would do but I'm still not entirely sure HOW he plans to do them. Romney's "binders full of women" comment was a strange thing for him to come out with and I was glad to see him finally taken to task for his 47% gaffe; again, I don't think he adequately explained himself there and failed to dig himself out of that particular hole. The race is still wide open and both men will have to improve for the last debate .

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:37 am

Note to Super Aurora:
Don't understand why photoshop is your ONLY talent, and that herky-jerky picture does not help or hinder your lack of understanding of how important these debates are. Surely you know how to speak and write English, so I am asking you to do so without cursing, which I have seen in some other posts seems to be the only 'language' you know or, for that matter, understand.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Having watched the Debate from last night, I also found that Obama came better prepared than the first debate. He had some very concise answers at times and avoided answers in other cases. I don't believe either side won this one, I am leaning more towards an even mark like CNN saw it, and not what MSNBC saw.

I am still wondering why Candy Crowley, the moderator, felt that she had to jump in on the Libya question and say that Obama used the word 'terror' in his national address from the White House Rose Garden the day after the Libyan massacre. But this morning, CNN is rallying in support of Crowley saying that she misspoke and forgot her role of the moderator for a moment. Ha!!! She is a very well known Liberal and was trying to make things a little easier for the Prez, and in turn made things a little worse for him. Obama still didn't tell the truth, or even answer the question, for that matter.

I however did like Obama's answer to the first question of the night about college students who are graduating with no job in sight. This is one of the places that I think both candidates have equal sites and problem-solving issues.

Next Monday, we will have the final debate and the subject will be 'Foreign Policy', and we all know that each candidate have their weak points and strong points in this matter. It should be interested.

I still have not opened the envelope with my Absentee Ballot in it yet. I thought it was going to be easy to pick my candidate, but I will wait until next Monday and then make my final decision. Though I talk and throw rocks at our current President and seem to support his opponent I can say that you don't understand what I am looking for in a President.

There are so many people who are going to be hurt if Obama gets re-elected. There are more jobs to be lost, but I am willing to say that Obama may be able to turn some of that around now that he knows, from last night's debate, exactly what America wants. I am looking forward to next week's debate and the time for a final decision.

And you 'haters' need to get off the 'women's' thing. Romney was just bringing up the fact that there are more women living under the poverty level of income. Romney believes in equal pay for equal work for women, Obama doesn't think that is a problem, but does nothing to solve it. And those of you who don't have Health insurance, or are being carried by your parents policy, look out for Obamacare. You will be hurt bigtime. I am really worried about Disneyboy20022 with his current medical issues, and concerns about his doctors. He doesn't think there will be a problem in 2014, but I think he should start asking questions now so that it doesn't come as a big surprise when he gets the door closed in his face.

I am still waiting for someone to answer the question "What has Obama done for you, personally, in the last four years"? No one seems to want to answer that.

ajmrowland · Post by **ajmrowland** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 10:43 am

So you're gonna insult Super Aurora cuz he likes to use photoshiop? t kinda gets the point across a little quicker than drawing from scratch.

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:25 am

Don't bother ajmrowland. DVD junkie lost all credibility long time ago. I'm ignoring him and his obvious bias despite he claim otherwise. Also I didn't make that Photoshop. I posted it cause I found it funny and shows Romney lack of respect for women with that comment he made.

Romney barely gave any specifics of how he'd do the job but Instead more often tried to fault Obama rather than explain how he fix the country and make it better than Obama's plan. All he says is I'd do this or I'd do that but never HOW he'd do. That's what people want. If you have a president that never specifiy on how and why, why are you even voting for him?

Obama won this round.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 11:58 am

Stupid......errr Super Aurora:

It was the current President who made the most damaging remark at last night's debate about women. Romney cited that over 3 million woman are now living under the poverty level.

You evidentally didn't watch the debate or only heard what you wanted to hear. There were mentions of women 80 times by both candidates and they only mentioned men less than 10 times.

You, who think that I have lost credibility are the ones who have lost their outlook on this campaign. You probably don't or won't read any of links to news because they are from Fox News, the Reagan Coalition, or something else. That is blind of each one of you. You are the ones who seem to have your minds made up and won't listen to anything anyone, let alone just me, and what they might have to say.

My only hope is that on November 7th you will come to this thread and apologize to me for not seeing the light of the wrongs and failures of Ex-President Obama. If I am wrong you can bet your bottom dollar I will be here admitting I was wrong. I don't believe in saying I told you so, but I will be gloating a bit when Romney/Ryan defeat Obama/Biden in 20 days. I hope you are just as anxious to apologize and admit that I was right and you were wrong. You probably won't because then that would be giving credibility to all that I have had to say in the past four pages.

If you don't want to look dumb or ignorant, take a few minutes and read what links I have posted and see if they aren't filled with more truths than you thought.

Here's what CNN's is back-peddling about concerning about Cathy Crowley:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10 ... ct-terror/

Be informed and read this carefully. A "Liberal" admits she was wrong. It must be awfully cold in hell now that the truth has come out.

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:47 pm

dvdjunkie wrote:Stupid......errr Super Aurora:

So now you're retorting to name calling on another member here. You really are a hypocrite.

I'm going to reply to just this post. I'll wait after election day to reply to you again. I'll keep my word for that, unlike someone.

dvdjunkie wrote:It was the current President who made the most damaging remark at last night's debate about women.

Give me the quote where he says this. Obama actually was being more supportive of women during that debate.

dvdjunkie wrote:Romney cited that over 3 million woman are now living under the poverty level.

You evidently didn't watch the debate or only heard what you wanted to hear. There were mentions of women 80 times by both candidates and they only mentioned men less than 10 times.

Romney didn't answer the girl's question. The girl's question was about women getting equal pay to men in workforce which most jobs men usually make more money. Romney's more or less was saying about hiring women but never about raising the pay for women. Romney is a businessman, it's obvious how he view women in the business.

also from politifact:

Asked about fair pay for women during the second presidential debate, President Barack Obama was quick to bring up the first piece of legislation he signed into law -- the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act.

Audience member Katherine Fenton asked Obama, "In what new ways to you intend to rectify the inequalities in the workplace, specifically regarding females making only 72 percent of what their male counterparts earn?"

Obama talked about being raised by a single mom who put herself through school and of his grandmother, who worked her way up from a bank secretary to a vice president but "hit the glass ceiling."

"She trained people who would end up becoming her bosses during the course of her career. She didn't complain. That's not what you did in that generation," he said at the debate at Hofstra University on Oct. 16, 2012. "And this is one of the reasons why one of the first -- the first bill I signed was something called the Lilly Ledbetter bill."

Romney responded by saying at one point he had more women in senior leadership positions than any other governor and that he wanted to help more women find jobs.

Obama jumped in, saying, "Katherine, I just want to point out that when Gov. Romney's campaign was asked about the Lilly Ledbetter bill, whether he supported it, he said, ‘I'll get back to you.’ And that's not the kind of advocacy that women need in any economy."

Did Romney and his campaign really refuse to say whether he supported the law? Sort of.

The law, which Obama signed on Jan. 29, 2009, made it easier for workers to pursue wage discrimination claims but received little Republican support in Congress. It updated 1960s civil rights and age discrimination laws to reset the statute of limitations on such claims with each new paycheck. In 2007, the Supreme Court had ruled in Ledbetter vs. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. that the 180-day statute of limitations started from the day an employer made the decision to discriminate — making it impossible for employees who learned of such discrimination later to get relief, such as back pay.

What did Romney have to say about it? For a previous fact-check in May, the Obama campaign directed us to a couple media reports.

In an April 2012 conference call covered by a Washington Post blogger, a Huffington Post reporter asked an unnamed Romney adviser whether Romney supported the Lilly Ledbetter Act. The adviser responded, "Sam (Stein), we’ll get back to you on that."

Later, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul clarified in an email, "He supports pay equity and is not looking to change current law."

The second piece the Obama campaign showed us was a Romney interview by Diane Sawyer of ABC News. Sawyer asked Romney, " If you were president — you had been president — would you have signed the Lilly Ledbetter Law?"

Romney’s response:

Romney: "It's certainly a piece of legislation I have no intention of changing. I wasn't there three years ago —"

Sawyer:: "But would you have signed it?"

Romney: "... I'm not going to go back and look at all the prior laws and say had I been there which ones would I have supported and signed, but I certainly support equal pay for women and — and have no intention of changing that law, don't think there's a reason to."

Here, Romney did refuse to say whether he would have signed the bill into law. But he also said he has "no intention of changing that law."

Our ruling

Obama said that when asked whether he would have signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act into law, Romney's campaign said, "I'll get back to you." His point was that the campaign was dodging the question.

Indeed, a Romney adviser did say earlier this year that he would "get back" to a reporter about whether he supported the Lilly Ledbetter Act. A spokeswoman then said he would not change it, and Romney later said he "certainly support(s) equal pay for women," and has "no intention of changing that law."

So Obama is correct about the initial statement, but Romney later clarified by saying he wouldn't change the law. We rate Obama's claim Mostly True.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter ... supports-/

It shows Romney tries to avoid this question. And before you sprout on that that link is "liberal bias" it's one of most neutral sites that help voters inform how much candidates from both parties are telling the truth.

dvdjunkie wrote:You, who think that I have lost credibility are the ones who have lost their outlook on this campaign.

dvdjunkie wrote:You probably don't or won't read any of links to news because they are from Fox News, the Reagan Coalition, or something else.

Those sites are obviously and blatantly bias to one political party that it isn't even funny. Even if I was a republican I would avoid those news media like the plague. Same with MSNBC. They're super bias too but on the liberal side. I told you before and i'll say it one more time, I get my sources from places like BBC which been shown to be one of the least bias new media station. You call me out that I'm "narrow minded and bias" just because I didn't go read into the links you posted. I don't need to go into it because it's pretty obvious what kind article it will be.

dvdjunkie wrote:That is blind of each one of you. You are the ones who seem to have your minds made up and won't listen to anything anyone, let alone just me, and what they might have to say.

You're doing the very same thing. Pot calling kettle black.

dvdjunkie wrote:My only hope is that on November 7th you will come to this thread and apologize to me for not seeing the light of the wrongs and failures of Ex-President Obama. If I am wrong you can bet your bottom dollar I will be here admitting I was wrong. I don't believe in saying I told you so, but I will be gloating a bit when Romney/Ryan defeat Obama/Biden in 20 days. I hope you are just as anxious to apologize and admit that I was right and you were wrong. You probably won't because then that would be giving credibility to all that I have had to say in the past four pages.

Fine I'll take you up for this deal. This should be interesting. But just so you are aware that as of the moment now, Obama still has the lead. For Romney to get ahead he will have to pull something really mind-blowing performance for 3rd debate(it's on Monday right?) to convince the undecided voters.

dvdjunkie wrote:If you don't want to look dumb or ignorant, take a few minutes and read what links I have posted and see if they aren't filled with more truths than you thought.

Here's what CNN's is back-peddling about concerning about Cathy Crowley:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10 ... ct-terror/

Be informed and read this carefully. A "Liberal" admits she was wrong. It must be awfully cold in hell now that the truth has come out.

It would make me dumb and ignorant if I go read the article. and CNN is one of those news media that tries to be neutral and unbias but fails. Also I don't give a shit what Crowley admits. But if you want go that route, when fox calls it a tie and then Krauthammer, a conservative(moderate one too) says Obama won - you know Obama won.

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 1:23 pm

Super Aurora.....I didn't call you a name, I corrected myself before continuing. I just felt that way about your posts, and really now I think you are blabbing on about things that are over your head, or you don't know anything about. At least I look into things before I start shedding my opinion, even if most of you don't agree, because I love people like Neal Boortz (author of the Fair Tax, which is recommended reading for all), Sean Hannity, Alan Colmes (probably the only left-winger I have any respect for), Herman Cain (who I would vote for without hesitation if he were still a condidate), and I avoid people like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh, like the plague they are.

I found this in my in-box and want to share it with everyone.

http://www.caintv.com/LeftLetstrytomake ... loutof-586

dvdjunkie · Post by **dvdjunkie** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 3:35 pm

This just in from the Republican National Committee. I really think people currently on Medicare or on a sponsored medical plan should read this and be aware of what will happen if:

http://www.nrcc.org/2012/10/17/dems-try ... -election/

CJ · Post by CJ » Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:04 pm

dvdjunkie wrote:Stupid......errr Super Aurora:

That is uncalled for Bill, personal attacks are not allowed in any form, and you know that! Any more personal attacks from any member, in any form will result in the closure of this thread.

Super Aurora · Post by **Super Aurora** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 4:55 pm

CJ wrote:
dvdjunkie wrote:Stupid......errr Super Aurora:
That is uncalled for Bill, personal attacks are not allowed in any form, and you know that! Any more personal attacks from any member, in any form will result in the closure of this thread.

Thanks. But it's ok. I am not taking any of his word seriously since his initials comments pages back.

In other news another article about candidates view on women

(Reuters) - With polls suggesting women voters were shifting their support to Mitt Romney, President Barack Obama made an aggressive pitch to them on Tuesday that yielded awkward moments for the Republican and a favorite new catch phrase on social media.

Obama hit hard on issues such as equal pay for women and contraception and abortion rights in the second of three presidential debates ahead of the November 6 election. The topics did not come up in the first debate on October 3, when Romney outshone the Democratic president.

Romney has gained ground on Obama in opinion polls since the first head-to-head and took the lead in many surveys. Reuters/Ipsos polling data showed the Democrat's support slipping among women, particularly married women.

Fifty-nine percent of married white women backed Romney for president, versus only 30.4 percent who picked Obama, according to data for the week ending October 14. That was a move of around eight points in Romney's favor since before the first debate.

With strong support among women essential to his hopes of winning re-election, Obama devoted much of the second debate toward shoring up their support.

He mentioned the women's health organization Planned Parenthood five times. He stressed that Romney had promised to defund the organization, which provides contraception and abortions, but also basic services like cancer screenings.

Romney hit back by saying that he would help women, and all Americans, by improving the sputtering economy. But the Republican offered fewer specifics on women's issues than Obama and at times seemed to stumble.

"Any ground that Mitt Romney gained over the last week or week and a half, he lost tonight," said Jennifer Lawless, director of the Women and Politics Institute at American University.

"Barack Obama was incredibly strong on appealing to women and casting doubt on Mitt Romney's statements."

One of the night's most memorable moments came when Romney was asked how he would ensure pay equity for women. He answered by recalling how, as governor of Massachusetts, he had been concerned when all of the applicants for his cabinet were men.

"I went to a number of women's groups and said, 'Can you help us find folks,' and they brought us whole binders full of women," Romney said.

Romney's somewhat awkward response lit up social media. The user name @RomneyBinders got its own Twitter account, and attracted more than 31,000 followers less than an hour after the debate ended. The hashtag #bindersfullofwomen was one of the 10 most common on the social media service.

Democrats said Romney's answer seemed to show he had few women in his inner circle, and the candidate did not directly address the pay equality issue.

"I don't think he substantively engaged on this matter that would make a real difference and that is an important issue in the conversation," said Tara McGuinness, executive director of the left-leaning Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Romney also talked about how he had offered flexible hours so his chief of staff could be with her children when they came home from school.

Romney's comments sounded like "they were from 50 years ago," said Christine Williams, a nurse practitioner from Shaker Heights, Ohio, who watched the debate at a viewing party in the crucial swing state.

In contrast, she said, "When Obama talks about that, it makes my soul sing."

ECONOMIC CASE

Romney cast his appeal to women in economic terms, repeatedly saying that millions of women had lost their jobs in the four years Obama has been president.

"There are 3.5 million more women living in poverty today than when the president took office," he said.

"What we can do to help young women and women of all ages is to have a strong economy, so strong that employers are looking to find good employees and bringing them into their workforce, and adapting to a flexible work schedule that gives women the opportunities that they would otherwise not be able to afford," he said.

Obama stressed his support for the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, the first bill he signed into law as president, which guarantees equal pay for women workers. Romney has declined to say whether he supports the law.

Analysts said Obama's performance was likely to stop the loss of support among women voters.

"We'll probably see some movement of women in a more pro-Obama direction after tonight," said Susan Carroll, senior scholar at the Center for American Women and Politics at Rutgers University. "I think some women saw the Obama that they hoped to see and were disappointed not to see the first debate."

Women in a snap poll by the Democratic Lake Research Partners picked Obama as the debate winner by 56-34 percent. Men also gave Obama the victory, but by a narrower 49-43 percent.

Romney strongly disputed an accusation by Obama that he "feels more comfortable having politicians in Washington decide the health-care choices that women are making."

He went out of his way to say: "Every women in America should have access to contraceptives... the president's statement of my policy is wrong."

Obama scored points by talking about his working mother and grandmother, and his children. "I've got two daughters and I want to make sure that they have the same opportunities that anybody's sons have," he said.

(The Reuters/Ipsos database is now public and searchable here: tinyurl.com/reuterspoll)

(Additional reporting by Alina Selyukh in Washington and Eric Johnson in Lakewood, Ohio; Editing by Alistair Bell, David Brunnstrom and Vicki Allen)

source: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/10/ ... AY20121017

Mitt really did shoot himself in the foot with the exception of hardcore Republican women and those who endorse the Stepford wife mentality. How women were leaning closer to Mitt is beyond me. Mitt may have hired women but utterly refused to answer about wage equality, which was the initial question that cute girl was asking in the first place. He's a businessman, and that's how he's view reflect that.[/quote]

ajmrowland · Post by **ajmrowland** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:26 pm

It takes a lot longer than overnight for somebody to change sides enough to no longer think their candidate was the best choice.

Maerj · Post by **Maerj** » Wed Oct 17, 2012 7:38 pm

Not that it matters at all. but President Obama DID use the word terror in his address after the Embassy attack. They played the clip this morning on the radio.

Really though, who cares? The term 'Terrorist' is so arbitrary. The government uses it to scare people. Who did it? The Terrorists! Who's gonna get you? The Terrorists!

The FBI just caught more... Terrorists. But take a closer look at the stories concerning these individuals. Almost every single one will tell you that we were never in any danger from The Terrorists because the FBI gives them fake bombs and guides them along the way. So, after goading people into doing these things, they arrest them and make themselves look like big heroes. It is what is known as a False Flag Operation.

Why I am I telling you this? So that you realize that we have no choice. I get that people don't like Obama, that's fine. But the big mistake that you are making is that believe that the other guy is going to do better. Its a game and you are playing right into their hands. The only way to win is not to play. Educate yourself on the real truths, spread the info. Don't trust any info that leans too far left or right. Both sides manipulate.

DVDizzy Forum

Latest Movie Reviews

🎬 DVDizzy Top Stories️️

Elections thread