Should Government Employees Be Allowed To Vote?

Started by kramarat, November 10, 2012, 06:46:59 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sci Fi Fan

Quote from: kramarat on November 13, 2012, 03:57:59 PM
Nope. You are represented in the background of the video. A typical Obama voter. Living in crap and happy about it.

Wanna see some real interviews with Obama voters?

You're probably not bright enough to see it, but your little video is closer to reality than you think.

You do realize that those "typical Obama voters" are voting for Obama because they feel that Barrack will work to give them the opportunity to escape poverty, while Romney comes off as not really giving a damn, right?

Do you think they weren't living in crap before Obama?

Yawn

They lost their chance for a job by voting Obama.  Now all they have to look forward to is hand-outs.  But that's all they really voted for anyway.

Solar

Quote from: a777pilot on November 13, 2012, 03:25:01 PM
This Obama, better known to me as, Bobo, the Post Turtle, does not fit any old definition.  He is a whole new virus.
You are correct.
Look up Fabian Socialist, Husein literally fits the mold they had in mind.

Fabians started the group the day Marx died, they believed in Marx' ideals, but felt they could achieve his goals without violence.
Of course they are fools, but Marxists through and through.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

Darth Fife

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 04:01:24 PM
You do realize that those "typical Obama voters" are voting for Obama because they feel that Barrack will work to give them the opportunity to escape poverty, while Romney comes off as not really giving a damn, right?

Do you think they weren't living in crap before Obama?

Do you think they won't still be living in crap long after Obama is gone?

kramarat

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 04:01:24 PM
You do realize that those "typical Obama voters" are voting for Obama because they feel that Barrack will work to give them the opportunity to escape poverty, while Romney comes off as not really giving a damn, right?

Do you think they weren't living in crap before Obama?

Poverty has done nothing but increase under democrats, and democrats have been hard at work to keep them there, for decades.

Obama = Opportunity?

You are one stupid SOB. :lol:

Sci Fi Fan

Quote from: kramarat on November 13, 2012, 05:43:20 PM
Poverty has done nothing but increase under democrats, and democrats have been hard at work to keep them there, for decades.

Since 1961, Republicans have held the White House for 4 more years than Democrats.  The Democrats have created almost twice as many jobs (42 million) in that time period.


kramarat

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 05:46:26 PM
Since 1961, Republicans have held the White House for 4 more years than Democrats.  The Democrats have created almost twice as many jobs (42 million) in that time period.

Show me.

Sci Fi Fan

Quote from: kramarat on November 13, 2012, 05:49:40 PM
Show me.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-says-democratic-presidents-top-republ/

Quote

Let's cut to the chase. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, here are the net increases in private-sector employment under each president, chronologically by party:

Republicans

Richard Nixon: Increase of 7.1 million jobs
Gerald Ford: Increase of 1.3 million jobs
Ronald Reagan: Increase of 14.7 million jobs
George H.W. Bush: Increase of 1.5 million jobs
George W. Bush: Decline of 646,000 jobs

Total: Increase of 23.9 million jobs under Republican presidents

Democrats

John F. Kennedy: Increase of 2.7 million jobs
Lyndon B. Johnson: Increase of 9.5 million jobs
Jimmy Carter: Increase of 9.0 million jobs
Bill Clinton: Increase of 20.8 million jobs
Barack Obama: Increase of 332,000 jobs

Total: Increase of 42.3 million jobs.

Before you try, this does not include government jobs, and the democrats had no advantage in population growth. 

Darth Fife

Did you read the whole article?

Shouldn't the Republican Congress of 1995-2001 get a share of the credit for Clinton's robust job growth? Shouldn't the Democratic House that served under Reagan? Most experts would say yes and yes.

kramarat

#84
Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on November 13, 2012, 05:51:22 PM
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/sep/06/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-says-democratic-presidents-top-republ/

Before you try, this does not include government jobs, and the democrats had no advantage in population growth.

Only democrats and liberal websites would believe that presidents create jobs in the private sector.

Republican or democrat, any private sector jobs that are created under the weight of our bloated government, are created in spite of the government, not because of them.