25 total posts
Sounds like the one we got
Nicely done...very professional and expensive looking. One would think he's running for his first term and not his second. I guess we're supposed to forget most of the last four years and hire him as a new guy.
Sounds like 2008 to me. Promises he did not keep.
It isn't so much the broken promise
It's more about the impossibility of what he is saying......does he honestly think people can't read and comprehend what it says? Double speak just doesn't get it done. It isn't mentioned in what I've read so far, but his logic on what I posted is the same as when he says he's going to take the money SAVED from the ending of the war(s) and INVEST/SPEND it on other crap.......yet he also says that money is BORROWED on a 'credit card' from CHINA.......He's telling us that HE plans to do the same thing but spend it on something else instead of a war.
Don't fault him too much
The one we got was specifically addressed to my wife
She asked me why it didn't have both our names on it. I told her it was probably because her name was female and Obama has divided the genders. She said that makes sense.
WHEW!!!!! THAT was close.
Is she registered to a different political party than you?
Neither of us are registered to any party
My daughter, who has lived away for almost two years, is also getting Obama mail. We've gotten Romney mail but it has both of our names. Earlier on, all my political calls and mail seemed to come from Obama sources or dealt with Democrat party platform issues. The Romney mail has come late but in tidal waves these past few weeks. The phone calls and robo messages have followed that same pattern. Most people I've spoken with wish this would all stop. I could suppose that saturating people's mailboxes and ringing their phones too often could backfire.
Micro-targetting the U.S. voter
Don't suppose she's a Closet Democrat, do you?
To put it another way, campaigns can now identify the one or two supporters they might have on a street of 15 homes in an enemy neighbourhood. And they can do it reliably and efficiently, in a way that might turn the tide.
As a result, Republicans and Democrats have both found new support where they never would have looked before.
Often they know more about how a single voter might behave in the voting booth than the voter knows herself.
If THEY can know more about her than she can know about herself....Don't think THEY can't know more about HER than YOU do.
My wife was, for 15 years,
a social worker. She's now a member of a teacher's union but in a Catholic school system so they don't strike. I'm sure she received this just for being female the same as she receives other mail supporting Obama based on gender. These mailings always speak about birth control and abortion. Of course those are the only two issues considered to be important enough to women to make them also important for political reasons. Women don't care about anything else, right?
Interestingly enough, I received a political mailing today that I mistook for a Romney add. The title on the front was "Had enough? " Well...Of course I've had enough. What a dumb question but it turned out that this was an Obama ad noting the sudden flood of Romney ads that were critical of the president. The "had enough" referred to Romney's negative campaigning. Duh!!...and Obama offers nothing but soft sell of himself and kind words for his rival? These ad people must think we're all stupid and gullible.
Ok, that's enough verbiage for now. Go ahead...copy and paste your heart out.
RE: copy and paste your heart out
some copy and paste...others pull stuff out of their *** and call it fact.
RE: Women don't care about anything else, right?
It's not that they don't care about anything else...it could be the most important thing they care about that affects their vote.
In an election the voter(whether male or female) can only vote for one person...they have to choose which is the most important factor that influences their vote, IF that's the most important factor to them...then that influences their vote.
They haven't perfected a method to tell exactly which "influencing factor" determines how an individual will vote, YET...But they are working on it.
How about going with the whole package
rather than the cherries? Would you pick a vacation site just because the weather was warmer than where you are now? There are nice cozy but barren deserts out there. Get yourself a beer cooler and lawn chair and move there for the next four years.
RE: How about going with the whole package
How about going with the whole package rather than the cherries?
Whichever party has the MOST "cherries" gets YOUR vote? And you're stuck with the "package".
That's what you are doing when you vote for the person that agrees with you on YOUR most important factor.
Do you agree with EVERY SINGLE plank in their platform?...As if you were sharing the same brain? Absolutely nothing they've said that you disagree with?
IF you disagree with anything they've said.....you're going with the whole package...Whether you want to or not.
IF you could "mix and match" politicians, would you build one with the points you like from each party?
We've way too many who agree with party planks
even before hearing what they are. When you go with a party and not a person, your thinking is already done for you. How simple this makes ones life when the brain doesn't need to work at all.
So you vote for a person that belongs to a party
that doesn't agree with them?
Sounds like a good move....Vote for a rebel.
I guess you call them Independents.
If it's any of your business
I voted for Dems, Reps and many who's party wasn't mentioned. I've done that as long as I've been voting. Picking by party is against family rules here. Both major parties are full of themselves. Unfortunately, good people...and bad...need to compromise themselves at times to get enough support to succeed in their election. Moderates probably make up most of those people I refer to as "good". I consider Romney as, by far, the most moderate of the two candidates. That's as far as I'll take this with you. Have at it if you wish. Glad to oblige.
Everwhere throughout this booklet
He refers to 'cuts' he will make and then in the next sentence he refers to how he will 'use the money saved' from those cuts to 'invest' in other projects or programs. There is NO possible way to cut and spend the same cut moneys and reduce the deficit......the money spent will be exactly the same but diverted to other areas so we will still be looking at $1T+ deficits every year AGAIN.
How does he get away with this crap?
It's like that pawn shop show
People go in there and sell some interesting and historical items sometimes for big money, then when they walk out, claim they are going to the casino or some other way of blowing the money away. That's they type of mentality I fear Obama has when it comes to cutting debt and spending. As my grandfather would say, "He can't rub two nickels together in his pocket without feeling the need to spend one".
You should hear his plan
for flying with shoestrings. Grab your shoestrings, pull them up hard enough, and you'll just float away.
You might be surprised
AND you read it?
Of course I read it
I actually DO look at both sides, unlike you and other liberals who only dig for dirt. I actually make an attempt to see and find reason and truth behind his words which are very colorful but has no substance. I even went to the trouble of finding a copy of the pamphlet for YOU, JP........read it and maybe even YOU will find something scary in his booklet of lies and deception that you can question.
If you find anything you deem to be disturbing, please don't hesitate to share.......and then I can also say "Mission Accomplished" or "BANG".
Amazing, but predictable
that not one liberal here in SE wishes to explain, or try to, BO's plan to cut and then spend the same money and not have it change the annual deficits let alone the national debt.