Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Anyone else watching the US debate today?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
actionjackson



Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

newb wrote:
In my experience, Democrats get energized and vote only when it concerns their entitlements such as food stamps and welfare checks.

So based on that assessment, they should be turning out in droves then?

Quote:
It’s important to remember that Romney’s budget is much, much more aggressive than Ryan’s. It’s less specific, so it gets less attention. Romney’s looking for $7 trillion. And he’s not keeping Ryan and Obama’s Medicare savings. And he’s increasing spending on defense by much more than Ryan does. So to pay for that defense spending and make up the Medicare cuts, he needs about $1.5 trillion more in cuts from the non-Medicare, non-defense side of the budget than Ryan has.

To make Romney’s numbers add up, you have to assume that by the end of his presidency, Romney will have cut every federal program that’s not Medicare, Social Security or defense spending by 57 percent.

But when Romney gets kind of serious, the big categories he identifies for cuts — and I’m quoting from his speech in Detroit here — are Medicaid, food stamps, housing subsidies and job training. Programs for the poor, in other words.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/22/the-real-romney-ryan-budgets-cuts-arent-to-medicare-theyre-to-programs-for-the-poor/

And not to hijack the thread, but why does it seem everyone rags on food stamps? I grew up on them, to a single parent of 3 who worked full-time in the PE department at a university and never made more than $24,000/year the whole time she worked there (she would've been considered support staff). I know there are people who take advantage of the system but the whole idea that someone who receives them is a moocher irritates me greatly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
northway



Joined: 05 Jul 2010

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swampfox10mm wrote:
If things stand as they are, I see Romney winning the popular vote by at least 5%, and squeaking through a win based on electoral votes.

When it comes down to it, too many liberal voters are not energized. Mitt's side is energized -- a large percentage of conservatives freakin' hate Barack.

Obama's people, not so energized... not enough to get off of their butt and go the polls, anyway. They can laugh, make "biders" jokes and call Romney a rich a-hole, but getting out and voting requires actual work. The reverse happens when things aren't so bad for the country that conservatives feel the need to get out and vote.

Like it or not, a sizable percentage of liberals will simply be too disinterested in changing their daily routine to hit the polls. It's nowhere near 47%, but it's a significant enough percentage that it will mean Obama won't get the same numbers we're seeing in poll results.

Remember... pollsters go ask people their opinion. It's an entirely different situation when you tell people they have to get off of the couch, get in a car, drive to a polling location, and cast a vote.


We've got a workplace full of liberals who have engaged in heated discussions with the few of us voting the other way. As of this date, I've voted, but not a single liberal has bothered to cast an absentee ballot. At least one of them is in a serious swing-state, too. But boy, oh boy, do they hate Mitt Romney. Just not enough to bother to vote for Obama, I guess.


You realize that polling agencies have been at this for awhile and apply likely voter filters to a lot of their polls, particularly this late in the game, right? Meaning that you're applying your own arbitrary filter to already filtered numbers?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kepler



Joined: 24 Sep 2007

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

As long as Obama maintains his lead in Ohio he'll probably win the election. Romney, however, could very easily win the popular vote.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swampfox10mm



Joined: 24 Mar 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

northway wrote:
Swampfox10mm wrote:
If things stand as they are, I see Romney winning the popular vote by at least 5%, and squeaking through a win based on electoral votes.

When it comes down to it, too many liberal voters are not energized. Mitt's side is energized -- a large percentage of conservatives freakin' hate Barack.

Obama's people, not so energized... not enough to get off of their butt and go the polls, anyway. They can laugh, make "biders" jokes and call Romney a rich a-hole, but getting out and voting requires actual work. The reverse happens when things aren't so bad for the country that conservatives feel the need to get out and vote. 4

Like it or not, a sizable percentage of liberals will simply be too disinterested in changing their daily routine to hit the polls. It's nowhere near 47%, but it's a significant enough percentage that it will mean Obama won't get the same numbers we're seeing in poll results.

Remember... pollsters go ask people their opinion. It's an entirely different situation when you tell people they have to get off of the couch, get in a car, drive to a polling location, and cast a vote.


We've got a workplace full of liberals who have engaged in heated discussions with the few of us voting the other way. As of this date, I've voted, but not a single liberal has bothered to cast an absentee ballot. At least one of them is in a serious swing-state, too. But boy, oh boy, do they hate Mitt Romney. Just not enough to bother to vote for Obama, I guess.


You realize that polling agencies have been at this for awhile and apply likely voter filters to a lot of their polls, particularly this late in the game, right? Meaning that you're applying your own arbitrary filter to already filtered numbers?


I see your point, but that didn't work for pollsters calling the recent Wisconsin union vote, just as an example. And the unions were highly energized.

But yeah, that electoral thing is a double-edged sword.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fosterman



Joined: 16 Nov 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Steelrails wrote:


Seriously, you gotta love the Dave's- "These people are dumber than me" attitude. What makes you so brilliant?


nice try.. but Fail!

first of all, you are comparing a basic ESL teacher like yourself, to the vice president of the united states of America.
nice analogy and comparison, but seriously? a esl hakwon teacher and the vice president of America?........ reach much? hahahahaha

Sarah palin is a friggin tool, and for the republican party to even consider her when there were far more educated, intelligent and experienced republicans for the position just shows me they are idiots.
but they still got 45% of the vote so I guess they thought palin was a role model, but then again she fitted right in, especially for the folk down in the deep south.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flakfizer



Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

fosterman wrote:
flakfizer wrote:
fosterman wrote:
flakfizer wrote:
fosterman wrote:
stupid is what stupid does.

remember mc cain still got 44% of the votes. that means 44% of the people who voted actually believed he could do a better job than obama.

Why would those idiots possibly think that a man who had served his country in war time, had served 2 full terms in the House and over 3 full terms in the Senate be able to run the US better than a community organizer who had not even completed a full term in the senate?
Oh well, I'm sure those idiots sure feel silly now that they've seen what a great job Obama's been doing.


Actually Obama was a Senator!
and frankly he has done a great job!
you think The Republicans could of done a better job? when it was the republican who put the economy into the state it was in when Obama took office, NO of course not, because if Mc Cain would of won the free fall would of kept falling and the world would of been a different place today!
sorry.. I know.. Facts hurts.. but them the facts.


I said Obama did not complete a term as senator, which he didn't. A senator's term is 6 years. He ran for pres during his one term.
Facts hurt? Please tell me which facts you're alluding to. You listed none.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Romney and maybe McCain would not have done any better than Obama, but the idea that only idiots voted for McCain and Obama was the only sane choice is ridiculous.
Please don't complain that "Americans can't really work together" if you're going to call an entire party or people who vote for it idiots.


seriously! SARAH PALIN! as vice president!? you think sane educated Americans should vote for that ticket?
ok buddy... keep waving the confederate flag.

This is one of the reasons I've lost a lot of respect for the democratic party the past several years. If you don't think Obama is great and consider voting for someone else, you must be a redneck racist. All I hear from the Dems these days is this sort of drivel, or "binders of women" or about a dog ride 30 years ago. It saddens me. I used to hear much more intelligent statement from the Dems.
And FYI, almost no one bases their vote on who the VP is. Have you heard Biden speak? People voted for Obama over McCain, not Biden over Palin.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
fosterman



Joined: 16 Nov 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

flakfizer wrote:
. Have you heard Biden speak? People voted for Obama over McCain, not Biden over Palin.


Biden is a legend in politics. he has been around since the Nixon Era!
he might not speak as a quick witted debater, but don't underestimate his intelligence, he has held some impressive titles in politics and he knows his way around the field, and yes, people do consider the vice president.
if MC CAIN had a heart attack, SARAH PALIN would be leading the country

enough said!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swampfox10mm



Joined: 24 Mar 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Actually, Biden is one of the things that will likely cost Obama this election. I sincerely hope they trot that old fart out as much as possible. He may be the favorite of the crass Democrat voters, but he is repulsive to many moderates -- particularly female.

The navy seal who coined him "a drunk uncle" was spot-on.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
fosterman



Joined: 16 Nov 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swampfox10mm wrote:
Actually, Biden is one of the things that will likely cost Obama this election. I sincerely hope they trot that old fart out as much as possible. He may be the favorite of the crass Democrat voters, but he is repulsive to many moderates -- particularly female.


really, I kind of thought females have a soft spot for him after losing his wife and kids in the car accident. and being a faithful man, and taking sides with female issues.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Swampfox10mm



Joined: 24 Mar 2011

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 5:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, Romney's numbers continued to grow after the VP debate, and pundits from both sides mentioned how Biden's rude style was a turn-off to moderates searching for meat and potatoes answers to important questions.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 6:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swampfox10mm wrote:
No, Romney's numbers continued to grow after the VP debate, and pundits from both sides mentioned how Biden's rude style was a turn-off to moderates searching for meat and potatoes answers to important questions.


If nutbar Romney wins, well, American voters will only have themselves to blame.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Unibrow



Joined: 20 Aug 2012

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope they have an honest discussion about our bloated "defense" budget. It's $700 billion and rising. That's hundreds of billions more than at the height of the Cold War. Who are we defending against? And Romney wants to increase the budget...this is insanity. We already spend more than the next 10 countries combined. We're bombing targets in Yemen and Somalia, far away from Iraq or Afghanistan. We're losing soldiers in Afghanistan until 2014, and for what? The Afghan government will collapse like a house of cards when NATO leaves, and Karzai will end up hanging from a pole like Najibullah.

But this is all fantasy. They're going to talk about Libya, China, Israel, and Syria.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newb



Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Location: Korea

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

actionjackson wrote:
newb wrote:
In my experience, Democrats get energized and vote only when it concerns their entitlements such as food stamps and welfare checks.

So based on that assessment, they should be turning out in droves then?
Quote:
It’s important to remember that Romney’s budget is much, much more aggressive than Ryan’s. It’s less specific, so it gets less attention. Romney’s looking for $7 trillion. And he’s not keeping Ryan and Obama’s Medicare savings. And he’s increasing spending on defense by much more than Ryan does. So to pay for that defense spending and make up the Medicare cuts, he needs about $1.5 trillion more in cuts from the non-Medicare, non-defense side of the budget than Ryan has.

To make Romney’s numbers add up, you have to assume that by the end of his presidency, Romney will have cut every federal program that’s not Medicare, Social Security or defense spending by 57 percent.

But when Romney gets kind of serious, the big categories he identifies for cuts — and I’m quoting from his speech in Detroit here — are Medicaid, food stamps, housing subsidies and job training. Programs for the poor, in other words.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/08/22/the-real-romney-ryan-budgets-cuts-arent-to-medicare-theyre-to-programs-for-the-poor/

And not to hijack the thread, but why does it seem everyone rags on food stamps? I grew up on them, to a single parent of 3 who worked full-time in the PE department at a university and never made more than $24,000/year the whole time she worked there (she would've been considered support staff). I know there are people who take advantage of the system but the whole idea that someone who receives them is a moocher irritates me greatly.


Glad to hear that your family benefited from it. But it also benefits illegals, cheaters, free loaders. They have no desire to contribute to the system, but steal from it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
flakfizer



Joined: 12 Nov 2004
Location: scaling the Cliffs of Insanity with a frayed rope.

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

PatrickGHBusan wrote:
Swampfox10mm wrote:
No, Romney's numbers continued to grow after the VP debate, and pundits from both sides mentioned how Biden's rude style was a turn-off to moderates searching for meat and potatoes answers to important questions.


If nutbar Romney wins, well, American voters will only have themselves to blame.

True, and if Obama wins and adds another 4 trillion dollars to the national debt, American voters will have only themselves to blame. Having only two viable candidates from the same two parties every election kinda makes a mockery of democracy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
newb



Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Location: Korea

PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

flakfizer wrote:
PatrickGHBusan wrote:
Swampfox10mm wrote:
No, Romney's numbers continued to grow after the VP debate, and pundits from both sides mentioned how Biden's rude style was a turn-off to moderates searching for meat and potatoes answers to important questions.


If nutbar Romney wins, well, American voters will only have themselves to blame.

True, and if Obama wins and adds another 4 trillion dollars to the national debt, American voters will have only themselves to blame. Having only two viable candidates from the same two parties every election kinda makes a mockery of democracy.


Actually, near 6 trillion dollars.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 4 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International