TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- USA - West Coast / Las Vegas
-- Anyone watch the final presidential debate tonight?
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by Miss Julia Not that I'm for McCain... but I kinda felt bad for him when he said Obama has spent the most amount of money on negative advertisements in the history of a presidential debate. He also said that on some of the advertisements, Obama lied and made false statements about McCain.

That's because obama has raised more money than any presidential candidate in history. Therefore, the ammount of money spent on both negative and positive ads have been record breaking.

Actually, McCain's ads have been far more negative (almost 100%) than obama's ads, per factcheck.org i believe.

Edit: just checked. 71% of mccain's ads have been negative, compared to 53% of obama's.

So, the sympathy vote should go to obama.

so the more money you have the more you should be able to spend on campaigning? I am all for the UK way. Campaigning is a joke. And all this money going into it later to be returned in favors of earmarks by either candidate is total bullshit.

quote:

Originally posted by element-y so the more money you have the more you should be able to spend on campaigning? I am all for the UK way. Campaigning is a joke. And all this money going into it later to be returned in favors of earmarks by either candidate is total bullshit.

actually yes! think percentages. if obama has 5 million and mccain has 1 million and obama spends 2 million and mccain spends 500,000

Yes obama has spent MORE, but MCCAIN has spent a larger PERCENT.(50%>40%)

I guess its too bad that so much money has been donated to the obama campaign, because umm....well, he's spending it!
PErish the thought!

when you were a kid and went trick or treating, and got all those candies, what did you do with them....did you toss them in the trash?

no, they were...ummm how should i say, consumed? maybe not by you, but im sure somebody ate them(older sis/ bro etc)

that was the purpose, to eat the candy.

the purpose of the donations, is to spend it. Otherwise, He can just put all the money leftover in a nice little fund and let it rake in some interest. its a slam dunk that OBAMA will win, unless something sketch happens(dade county Florida 2000)

quote:

Originally posted by starboy That's because obama has raised more money than any presidential candidate in history. Therefore, the ammount of money spent on both negative and positive ads have been record breaking. Actually, McCain's ads have been far more negative (almost 100%) than obama's ads, per factcheck.org i believe. Edit: just checked. 71% of mccain's ads have been negative, compared to 53% of obama's. So, the sympathy vote should go to obama.

Agree 100%

McCain was being particularly sneaky there, making a statement about absolute dollars spent. Misleading at best. More like deceptive.

quote:

Originally posted by element-y yea, obama is clearly far better of a speaker than mccain is, and is far more eloquent. So when something like this happens, where the two are so opposite in how the express opinion, the eloquent one comes out on top by far. You can avoid the attacks, respond to attacks, and attack, and still come of looking cool. You might be saying the exact same thing almost, but in how you phrase it, everything changes.

Agreed. Obama is not that better than McCain in terms of solutions he got to offer for the economy issues, and pretty much evrything else. Recall when asked how positive he was that all his "well-forged" plans are likely to be carried out, and how soon into his 1st term if he was to be president, the people are supposed to see changes, he said the exact same as McCain did. And lots of other times when he openly admitted his agreements towards McCain's ideas. It's just one side of the table appears calm, eloquent, and dealing out what viewers want to hear, while as the other side of the table... But just because someone says what we want to hear, just because someone can get in touch with some of us's passions and needs, and present his images based on that, does that mean he's more qualified than the other?

quote:

Originally posted by starboy That's because obama has raised more money than any presidential candidate in history. Therefore, the ammount of money spent on both negative and positive ads have been record breaking. Actually, McCain's ads have been far more negative (almost 100%) than obama's ads, per factcheck.org i believe. Edit: just checked. 71% of mccain's ads have been negative, compared to 53% of obama's. So, the sympathy vote should go to obama.

Ya, I agree with you.

Then McCain must have lied last night. He said that 100% of the advertisements were something false and negative against him lol.

That's republican politics as usual.

100% of the ADs mccain was running YESTERDAY were negative. that is true. 100% of the ads mccain has RUN over the entire campaign HAVE NOT been negative.

common sense prevails here.

maybe today 0% of McCains ads will be negative....


AGAIN-ITS ALL ABOUT PERCENTS!

quote:

Originally posted by Miss Julia Ya, I agree with you. Then McCain must have lied last night. He said that 100% of the advertisements were something false and negative against him lol.

yea the whole energy debate when asked in your first term, both went on to say the 10 year thing. Obama supporters clearly will miss that and say he gave facts opposed to mccain because simply the guy is more eloquent.

As more campaign funding, yes he got more money and it is meant to be spent, but what about also rejecting funds as orinigally put forth by obama from the start? Why not raise the limit to how much someone can give? All this will be returned in earmarks. If you are blind and dont see how this works, take some econ/politic classes. You do know that once elected, obama will cover almost if not all of hillary clonton's debt loss from the campaign. They are already saying in left wing news that she doesn't have much, but OH YEA she does haha.

And yea, analyze your percentages. Mccains new ads are negative, but that doesnt add to 100 percent if he has some positive ones there...

quote:

Originally posted by element-y And yea, analyze your percentages. Mccains new ads are negative, but that doesnt add to 100 percent if he has some positive ones there...

100% of the ADs mccain was running YESTERDAY were negative. that is true. 100% of the ads mccain has RUN over the entire campaign HAVE NOT been negative.

yesterday he had 0 positive ones out, and all were negative therefore 100% of his ads were negative.

if TODAY all his ads are POSITIVE and NONE are NEGATIVE then he will have ZERO % negative ads(FOR TODAY)

so element-y
watch tv, look for mccains ad, and keep a tally....then you can give us a percent.

or wait for one of the watchdog organizations to do it for us.

quote:

Originally posted by element-y As more campaign funding, yes he got more money and it is meant to be spent, but what about also rejecting funds as orinigally put forth by obama from the start? Why not raise the limit to how much someone can give? All this will be returned in earmarks. If you are blind and dont see how this works, take some econ/politic classes. You do know that once elected, obama will cover almost if not all of hillary clonton's debt loss from the campaign. They are already saying in left wing news that she doesn't have much, but OH YEA she does haha.

ha i knew it, you are a cynic! first of all, the money you raise in the campaign you either spend on the campaign or you lose for good. considering all the exhaustive effort put into getting those dollars from the outset by every candidate in every election, it only makes sense to spend it disseminating your message because it does have a direct effect on winning elections. secondly, 94% of obama's 450 million fundraising dollars came from individual contributions of $2000 or less. finally, when interest groups do donate to the campaign, they do not buy politicians as you claim. that's a very cynical view of the process. what a large contribution does buy is access to the politician once in office. buying access as a lobbyist only gets your foot in the door of the office, it does not guarantee you anything. earmarks are a popular demon of this campaign, but it has nothing to do with campaign contributors and everything to do with lawmakers (not the president) and their constituents.

Honestly, since we're given only 2 viable alternatives here (fcuk this bs btw), either of them can be president, and it wouldn't matter much. Think Obama is gonna outclass McCain, was he to be president? Yea let's see how he's gonna trance it out. Think McCain is gonna blow it, hey I'll brave all his good qualities.
One thing that bothers me from the debate lst night though, the 2 candidates both mentioned about our current of free trades with countries like S.Korea and Peru and stuff, and stated how unfair it is for the Americans. For example, Obama gave a number like we import 100k S.Korean's cars yearly, when they let only 4k of ours into their countries. McCain said something about an annual 1 bill $ we loose due to the Peruvian trade. I haven't got time to verify this. But if all is true, then I'm like WTF?!!? Whoever be president, just make sure America's interests are protected. Free trade means fair trade, and if those fcukers keep takin advantage of our economy, I say we let them rot in their shit holes. See who needs whom more. American interests go first!

quote:

Originally posted by Psylife Honestly, since we're given only 2 viable alternatives here (fcuk this bs btw), either of them can be president, and it wouldn't matter much. Think Obama is gonna outclass McCain, was he to be president? Yea let's see how he's gonna trance it out. Think McCain is gonna blow it, hey I'll brave all his good qualities. One thing that bothers me from the debate lst night though, the 2 candidates both mentioned about our current of free trades with countries like S.Korea and Peru and stuff, and stated how unfair it is for the Americans. For example, Obama gave a number like we import 100k S.Korean's cars yearly, when they let only 4k of ours into their countries. McCain said something about an annual 1 bill $ we loose due to the Peruvian trade. I haven't got time to verify this. But if all is true, then I'm like WTF?!!? Whoever be president, just make sure American's interests are protected. Free trade means fair trade, and if those fcukers keep takin advantage of our economy, I say we let them rot in their shit holes. See who needs whom more. American's interests go first!

what the fuck

quote:

Originally posted by R!CH ha i knew it, you are a cynic! first of all, the money you raise in the campaign you either spend on the campaign or you lose for good. considering all the exhaustive effort put into getting those dollars from the outset by every candidate in every election, it only makes sense to spend it disseminating your message because it does have a direct effect on winning elections. secondly, 94% of obama's 450 million fundraising dollars came from individual contributions of $2000 or less. finally, when interest groups do donate to the campaign, they do not buy politicians as you claim. that's a very cynical view of the process. what a large contribution does buy is access to the politician once in office. buying access as a lobbyist only gets your foot in the door of the office, it does not guarantee you anything. earmarks are a popular demon of this campaign, but it has nothing to do with campaign contributors and everything to do with lawmakers (not the president) and their constituents.

in an ideal situation you are right. But clearly this is not the case. Many organizations use intermediate ways of funding to bypass the easy 2,000 limit. The thing is a joke. And yea, idealy, lobbyists woudnt have say right? Well, in reality that is so far from the truth.

LOL R!CH, The guy is a fuckin trial attorney, of course he is going to be a smooth talker, and come off as calm and collective. Which is the main reason he has made it so far in this election in my opinion.

We cant say much about his decision making, respect he may have from both our allies and our enemies. We cant say much about his economic strategies either. All we can do is hope he surrounds himself with the right people to help him along the way.

But to say he has been straight forward this entire election is obsurd and wrong. The guy was all over the place in the primaries, and has been untruthful on numerous occasions. One being his stance on public funds for his campaign. Another being his policy on taxes, which started at those making 1 million, and has now arrived at those making 250k. To dismiss his ideas as far from socialist as you do rich is also wrong. Taxing the wealthy, and distributing to the poor? Who should have the right to do this? its just wrong, and goes against what america stands for.

And on that note, you think raising taxes on small business men making 250k is going to help? They will simply lay off middle class workers like you and I to make up for it. You think taxing big oil companies is going help the middle class? Lets remember that when they raise the price of gas to make up the revenues lost by the increase in taxes.

These tax proposals just sound good for the middle class, because they are supposed to in order to win votes. It isnt going to help the middle class much at all.

there goes Josh again

dude just vote for Joe The Plumber

quote:

Originally posted by xenpro there goes Josh again dude just vote for Joe The Plumber

dude you got it!

Ahh, so sad. R!ch, who resides in a lawless blue area of urban crime and government handouts like foodstamps, shamelessly showcases his worsening symptoms of myopia and marked deficiencies in perception due to his overwhelming disease of Libtardism! How can R!ch even claim he's a libetarian when he longingly wants to be the first in line to suckle off of Al-Barrack Hussein Osama's teet? Of course R!ch is a socialist and is for re-distribution of wealth. Why else would he be creating a thread asking for cheap meals (near-hand outs) in Vegas? Since I earn over 250, what right does Osama have to tax (usurp) me more and hand it out to those who haven't earned it? Didn't anyone tell him the top 10% pay 80% of the taxes? My colleague (>250 earner) is setting up more tax shelters as I type this very moment! The backlash will be monumental. That is, small businesses laying off workers, corporations passing down tax burdens to you and I, more tax shelters and off-shore accounts will be created, class war-fare surges, less clinicians in healthcare, I could go on and on and on.. This, my absolute truths, is irrefutable

quote:

Originally posted by T.A.S.D. Ahh, so sad. R!ch, who resides in a lawless blue area of urban crime and government handouts like foodstamps, shamelessly showcases his worsening symptoms of myopia and marked deficiencies in perception due to his overwhelming disease of Libtardism! How can R!ch even claim he's a libetarian when he longingly wants to be the first in line to suckle off of Al-Barrack Hussein Osama's teet? Of course R!ch is a socialist and is for re-distribution of wealth. Why else would he be creating a thread asking for cheap meals (near-hand outs) in Vegas? Since I earn over 250, what right does Osama have to tax (usurp) me more and hand it out to those who haven't earned it? Didn't anyone tell him the top 10% pay 80% of the taxes? My colleague (>250 earner) is setting up more tax shelters as I type this very moment! The backlash will be monumental. That is, small businesses laying off workers, corporations passing down tax burdens to you and I, more tax shelters and off-shore accounts will be created, class war-fare surges, less clinicians in healthcare, I could go on and on and on.. This, my absolute truths, are irrefutable

LOL, anybody know who this guy is yet?

quote:

of course he is going to be a smooth talker, and come off as calm and collective. Which is the main reason he has made it so far in this election in my opinion.

You're right. obama has made it this far by being calm and collective (presidential) unlike mccain who's been, erratic and unstable.

quote:

We cant say much about his decision making

How about mccain's decision making. Like his decisions to vote with george bush on 90% of issues, or his decisions to vote against regulation that put us into the financial crisis we're in right now.

quote:

Taxing the wealthy, and distributing to the poor? Who should have the right to do this? its just wrong, and goes against what america stands for.

Without the distribution there is no way to give tax breaks to 95% of americans (middle class) therefore making it that much more difficult for the average american worker to someday open up their own company and enjoy the wealth.

quote:

And on that note, you think raising taxes on small business men making 250k is going to help?

Yes it will help. A lot of businesses in this bracket nowadays are struggling. Why do you think this is? our economy is stuggling as a whole, and john mccain wants to give tax breaks to the richest ceo's and oil company's in the country. Obama wants to give tax breaks to the middle class, therefore creating more money and costomers for the small businesses you're talking about.

quote:

These tax proposals just sound good for the middle class, because they are supposed to in order to win votes. It isnt going to help the middle class much at all.

Actually, Obama's tax plan is much like bill clinton's was. Clinton created a huge surplus, and unemployement was at an all time low. Bush took over, changed the tax plan, and look where we are. An economic crisis, huge deficit, and unemployement through the roof. Mccain's tax plan is much like bush's need i say more?

Oh jesus, the T.A.R.D. is back....

oh, i'm sorry.. TASD pulling for the uneducated masses. How can you possibly be lured into anything Mccain is pushing for. Keep beating that dead horse buddy.

Are you that retarded you equate a Vegas trip with Government handouts.. you really are just letting air out of your own mattress.

Seventy fuckin TWO.. I don't need a president with a bucket list.
Once again, the Republica't shows his true TARD'ed bias.

quote:

Originally posted by T.A.S.D. Ahh, so sad. R!ch, who resides in a lawless blue area of urban crime and government handouts like foodstamps, shamelessly showcases his worsening symptoms of myopia and marked deficiencies in perception due to his overwhelming disease of Libtardism! How can R!ch even claim he's a libetarian when he longingly wants to be the first in line to suckle off of Al-Barrack Hussein Osama's teet? Of course R!ch is a socialist and is for re-distribution of wealth. Why else would he be creating a thread asking for cheap meals (near-hand outs) in Vegas? Since I earn over 250, what right does Osama have to tax (usurp) me more and hand it out to those who haven't earned it? Didn't anyone tell him the top 10% pay 80% of the taxes? My colleague (>250 earner) is setting up more tax shelters as I type this very moment! The backlash will be monumental. That is, small businesses laying off workers, corporations passing down tax burdens to you and I, more tax shelters and off-shore accounts will be created, class war-fare surges, less clinicians in healthcare, I could go on and on and on.. This, my absolute truths, are irrefutable

Thankfully, this is only the small (ignored) lunatic republican base talking. Havn't we seen you at recent palin rallys shouting "terrorist" and "off with his head"?

Joe the plumber.

http://crooksandliars.com/david-nei...keating-family-

quote:

Turns out that Joe Wurzelbacher from the Toledo event is a close relative of Robert Wurzelbacher of Milford, Ohio. Who�s Robert Wurzelbacher? Only Charles Keating�s son-in-law and the former senior vice president of American Continental, the parent company of the infamous Lincoln Savings and Loan. The now retired elder Wurzelbacher is also a major contributor to Republican causes giving well over $10,000 in the last few years.

TASD does make over 250k

here is his house in riverside

"Turn your fuckin radio down in the TRAILER dude, i'm trying to argue on the internets"!

Starboy: Major lulz and props for posting that.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.