2012 Presidential Election discussion thread (Obama vs Romney)

most viewed right now
 105
Image(s) inside Yall thought Twitter on Big Sean was bad? Check out the comments about..
149 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 82
Article inside Salma Hayek claims Harvey Weinstein threatened 'I will kill you, don'..
79 comments
@movies
most viewed right now
 81
Post Malone almost commits career suicide on stream
94 comments
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 66
Image(s) inside Learn the difference between a DR. Wife and a "Boxden Simp Thot"!
135 comments
@thotsdimesetc

section   (0 bx goons and 1 bystanders) Share this on Twitter   Share this on Facebook
 

Props Slaps
 5 years ago '12        #301
Julian 5 heat pts
space
avatar space
space
$4,684 | Props total: 2302 2302
I voting for Obama and admit he took that L. Next one I bet who go all out. Once talks on women, gay rights and foreign policy get brought up Mitt taking a L on those right away.
 10-04-2012, 03:16 PM         #302
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Heisenberg said:


This n*gga mitt was just in Hollywood for a fundraiser with jerry Bruckheimer and a bunch of other celebs
And??? Obama is with hollywood stars every week.
 5 years ago '12        #303
ALTheGreatS 23 heat pts23
space
avatar space
space
$4,470 | Props total: 900 900
 canesin2099 said:
He touched on most of that, but in 2 minute segs you can't go all in so to speak. I ain't even gonna lie, Romney impressed the shat out of me last night. Maybe he isn't as big of a dumbass than I thought. I will roll with the cracker. I see a stark contrast between him and the Bush's. That is what stuck with me. I think Romney is Clinton all over again. Both did what was right with bi partisan support. Bush nor Obama could do either.
You cannot give Reputation to the same post twice
.
 10-04-2012, 03:20 PM         #304
Drone 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Julian said:
I voting for Obama and admit he took that L. Next one I bet who go all out. Once talks on women, gay rights and foreign policy get brought up Mitt taking a L on those right away.
Obama should murder Romney on foreign policy but he has to do fantastic in that debate in order to make up the upcoming massacre that Biden will face when he does his debate.
 10-04-2012, 03:27 PM         #305
Drone 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
President Obama: “Thank goodness somebody is finally getting tough on Big Bird.”

David Burge: “No wonder lefties identify with Big Bird. A 43 year old welfare layabout with imaginary friends.”

Ari Fleischer: “Big Bird needs to ask Dora the Explorer how she manages 2live without taxpayer money. Try it Big Bird. You’ll be just fine.”

Kelkulus: “Big Bird’s advantage: When it’s his turn to rant about Romney to an empty chair, it will actually be occupied by an invisible Snuffleupagus.”

pddavis13: “He may like Big Bird, but I bet Mitt is suspicious of Bert & Ernie’s relationship! #BigBird”

Thomas Miles: “What kinda man fires Big Bird? You think Oscar is grouchy now…wait till he hears this!!”

Mike Birbiglia: “The candidates discussed Big Bird, but glossed over “Grover versus Wade.”"

Josh Hara: “Mentioning Big Bird in the debate is like giving the internet a soft piece of felt it can rub against its face for the rest of the week.”

James Erwin: “I’ll never be able to convince 47 percent of children to care about the letter D” – Big Bird

Mark Campbell: “Big Bird calls Nickelodeon to see if they are interested in him hosting a late-night talk show about the alphabet.”

Brian Sullivan of CNBC: “Tons of great substance on both sides of this debate. Sadly, what will trend tomorrow is Big Bird. Thank god no one mentioned Honey Boo Boo”

 5 years ago '11        #306
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 ALTheGreatS said:
I'd like to post something I read from a Facebook user. This right here summed up everything I felt about this President and the reason he will not be getting my vote this election. Rag on me if you will



The nation is in a horrible fiscal situation because of the Bush policies that Romney want to continue. Bush tax cuts = higher deficits. Higher deficits = horrible fiscal situations. It's no secret Romney wants to continue you those plans. From Romney's own campaign:

"The goals that President Bush pursued in bringing rates down to their current level -- to spur economic growth, encourage savings and investment, and help struggling Americans make ends meet -- are just as important today as they were a decade ago"

Pg. 40



Did we see any economic growth, increase in savings and investment? Or did we see an increase in the deficit.

Yea, Obama is not a full time president. He's just taking less vacations then his predecessor.

If you want to vote for Romney, that's cool but dont be using false statements like fiscal policy when history has shown us Republican policies increases the debt more.



Last edited by Kadillac87; 10-04-2012 at 03:32 PM..
 10-04-2012, 03:33 PM         #307
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 foshomoney said:
I'd rather have a president hanging with stars and in touch with reality. Than a racist ego-tripping pompous idoit who writes of 50% of the country.
Yet those are the 1%ers your party admonishes. Truly bewilders me. You have no problem with athletes making 20 mil a year, but you do have a problem with a CEO making that much. I don't get it.
 5 years ago '11        #308
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 canesin2099 said:
Yet those are the 1%ers your party admonishes. Truly bewilders me. You have no problem with athletes making 20 mil a year, but you do have a problem with a CEO making that much. I don't get it.
Athletes get paid for performance. CEOS get paid no matter what and if their actions happen to crash the economy, they get a golden parachute. There's a big difference between a small few who deliberately manipulate financial statements to line their pockets while sacrificing the majority and those who get paid for a good or service.
 10-04-2012, 03:39 PM         #309
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
The nation is in a horrible fiscal situation because of the Bush policies that Romney want to continue. Bush tax cuts = higher deficits. Higher deficits = horrible fiscal situations. It's no secret Romney wants to continue you those plans. From Romney's own campaign:

"The goals that President Bush pursued in bringing rates down to their current level -- to spur economic growth, encourage savings and investment, and help struggling Americans make ends meet -- are just as important today as they were a decade ago"

Pg. 40



Did we see any economic growth, increase in savings and investment? Or did we see an increase in the deficit.

Yea, Obama is not a full time president. He's just taking less vacations then his predecessor.

If you want to vote for Romney, that's cool but dont be using false statements like fiscal policy when history has shown us Republican policies increases the debt more.

Ok so I see this a lot. I read all the time that Obama is k!lled by a Republican house. So why does Clinton get credit?? When our economic boom happened it was due to Republican laws. Hate on Newt all you want, Newt made Clinton a celebrity. So which is it? Our system needs checks and balances, and when either party has total control, WE THE PEOPLE LOSE. Period, end of story. Clinton passed Glass-steagal and Nafta, yet nobody wants to talk about the ramifications on the future economy and how they played a MAJOR role.

You blame Bush, but I never see anything about 9/11 and Katrina in the statistics. Do you realize how much that cost this country? Bush was a Rino though, grew the government more than any other Republican ever. Obama is Bush on roids. Both were losers.
 10-04-2012, 03:44 PM         #310
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 foshomoney said:



[pic - click to view]



you can't be serious! Are you saying that atheletes get tax breaks that ceo's don't or Obama hates CEO's because taxing the rich makes more sense than taxing the poor.
You mean like Obama's right hand men?? You mean GE that paid zero taxes while shipping jobs out? You mean like Corzine who lost 2 billion dollars of we the people's money yet Obama called him a brilliant economist?? Geezus christ, there is no helping you people that see things in black and white. How bout Van Jones, how much money did he make? Do you have a problem with him and all the failed, cough cough, handouts that were given to the big Obama donors. Keep thinking the R and L really are that different. I've voted for Democrats, but I would bet my life you have never ever supported a Republican.
 10-04-2012, 03:45 PM         #311
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
Athletes get paid for performance. CEOS get paid no matter what and if their actions happen to crash the economy, they get a golden parachute. There's a big difference between a small few who deliberately manipulate financial statements to line their pockets while sacrificing the majority and those who get paid for a good or service.
LMAO, that isn't remotely true. CEO"s get fired without 5 year deals. Actors get paid no matter if the film does well or not. There is no guaranteed money for CEO's.
 5 years ago '11        #312
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 canesin2099 said:
Ok so I see this a lot. I read all the time that Obama is k!lled by a Republican house. So why does Clinton get credit?? When our economic boom happened it was due to Republican laws. Hate on Newt all you want, Newt made Clinton a celebrity. So which is it? Our system needs checks and balances, and when either party has total control, WE THE PEOPLE LOSE. Period, end of story. Clinton passed Glass-steagal and Nafta, yet nobody wants to talk about the ramifications on the future economy and how they played a MAJOR role.

You blame Bush, but I never see anything about 9/11 and Katrina in the statistics. Do you realize how much that cost this country? Bush was a Rino though, grew the government more than any other Republican ever. Obama is Bush on roids. Both were losers.
Because Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy. He didn't cut them like Bush. Republicans said it would k!ll the economy, like they are saying now. Guess what happened? Just like Republicans said the Bush tax cuts would grow the economy. That didn't happen. Guess what they are saying now?



Reagan raised taxes. Clinton raised taxes. Both Bushes lowered taxes. Which policy gave the economy more growth? How many times do we have to go through this to realize that lowering taxes do not encourage growth.
 10-04-2012, 03:51 PM         #313
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 Kadillac87 said:
Because Clinton raised taxes on the wealthy. He didn't cut them like Bush. Republicans said it would k!ll the economy, like they are saying now. Guess what happened? Just like Republicans said the Bush tax cuts would grow the economy. That didn't happen. Guess what they are saying now?



Reagan raised taxes. Clinton raised taxes. Both Bushes lowered taxes. Which policy gave the economy more growth?
WRONG

I would debate you but you have no clue what you speak. Bush sr lost the election and my vote because he raised taxes and I voted for Clinton because of it. Clinton was able to raise taxes because of the net boom. It was the revenue created by the business that created wealth, not the taxes. We still had a deficit just so you know.
 5 years ago '11        #314
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 canesin2099 said:
LMAO, that isn't remotely true. CEO"s get fired without 5 year deals. Actors get paid no matter if the film does well or not. There is no guaranteed money for CEO's.
You have no idea how financial documents are manipulated to show profits that benefit only the board and eventually shaft the investors.
 5 years ago '05        #315
StateProperty88 34 heat pts34
space
avatar space
space
$39,881 | Props total: 8403 8403
 canesin2099 said:
It was the revenue created by the business that created wealth, not the taxes. We still had a deficit just so you know.
its both. you cant say taxes had nothing to do with it when it still is revenue
 5 years ago '04        #316
dblock187s 27 heat pts27
space
avatar space
space
$10,824 | Props total: 2286 2286
rope a dope
 5 years ago '11        #317
Kadillac87 225 heat pts225
space
avatar space
space
$17,495 | Props total: 6665 6665
 canesin2099 said:
WRONG

I would debate you but you have no clue what you speak. Bush sr lost the election and my vote because he raised taxes and I voted for Clinton because of it. Clinton was able to raise taxes because of the net boom. It was the revenue created by the business that created wealth, not the taxes. We still had a deficit just so you know.
Tell me how I'm wrong. When Reagan first came into office, he followed the Republican model. Cut taxes for the job creators and the economy flourished right? WRONG. It didn't flourish until he raised taxes. The policy of cutting taxes for the job creators doesn't work. Show me where it has worked. I admit, I mispoke about H.W. Bush. He raised taxes in a compromise. And many people credit the 1990 Budget Enforcement Act of revenue increase and spending cuts for one of the major reasons for Clinton's economy.


Last edited by Kadillac87; 10-04-2012 at 04:07 PM..
 10-04-2012, 04:11 PM         #318
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 StateProperty88 said:
its both. you cant say taxes had nothing to do with it when it still is revenue
Geezus, I give up with you people. So, what happened when that bubble crashed and people dealt with high taxes? You really prove my point, when things are good, you raise taxes, that spurs growth sure, because the growth is already there and people don't mind paying the extra tax, but when that bubble busted, people were left with losses and taxes on top of that.

Obama talks math. Yeah lets do that. Take 10 million new jobs, multiply that by that 40000, and divide it by 40%. How much revenue does that create?
 10-04-2012, 04:13 PM         #319
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
So you slurpers don't care about glass steagal and NAFTA. I mean that had more to do with our economic demise than any tax you want to bring up.
 10-04-2012, 04:14 PM         #320
canesin2099 
space
space
space
$n/a | Props total:  
 foshomoney said:
Nope I'm blue blood though and through why would I support a republi-racist?
first you say this

then this


So you act like obama has a problem with CEO's then talk about obama hooking ceo's up. Are you bi-polar?
I didn't talk about Obama and Ceo's. I talked about the attack on who you choose to not be worthy of wealth. Lebron makes 100 mil a year, good for him, a CEO makes 40 mil a year, he is the devil to you.
Home      
  
 

 






most viewed right now
 54
NFL The Explicit Details of Accusations Vs NFL Network Employees
152 comments
2 days ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 18
Floor Kids (Game looks dope)
20 comments
2 days ago
@games
most viewed right now
 15
Image(s) inside X-MEN return to Marvel Studios in less than 48 hours
89 comments
2 days ago
@movies
most viewed right now
 12
Image(s) inside Snippets of American Dream-Cole ft. Kendrick
46 comments
2 days ago
@hiphop
most viewed right now
 11
Dec 12 - US 'Living Off 1950s Infrastructure,' Must Spend $2 Trillion to Moder..
78 comments
2 days ago
@news
most viewed right now
 7
Image(s) inside Who's jumping on this Tron(Trx) Spaceship??
96 comments
2 days ago
@misc
most viewed right now
 7
BOX Mayweather reveals comeback offer, fighting in ufc; poppin mad sh*t:"th..
71 comments
2 days ago
@sports
most viewed right now
 5
NBA LONZO BALL FULL HIGHLIGHTS DEBUT GAME IN NY GOES OFF FROM 3 POINT LAND :mj..
50 comments
1 day ago
@sports
back to top
register contact Follow BX @ Twitter Follow BX @ Facebook search BX privacy