New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

Voters are angry?!? Goddammit.

I think the poll must be pretty accurate. Among my friends and acquaintances, their responses are the same--nobody likes the direction the country is going.
 
I think the poll must be pretty accurate. Among my friends and acquaintances, their responses are the same--nobody likes the direction the country is going.

If people don't like the direction of America why are the same dumbom always get elected

.
 
I think the poll must be pretty accurate. Among my friends and acquaintances, their responses are the same--nobody likes the direction the country is going.
Well, let's look at that direction. The stock market is higher today than it was at the end of last year. The most recent year's Census figures showed rising median real incomes, falling poverty rates, and a growing share of Americans covered by health insurance. The deficit fell by about $31 billion between FY 2013 and FY 2014. The rate at which Americans have been KIA has fallen by half in the last year. Preliminary FBI data suggests murder and violent crime rates have continued to fall, as they have throughout the Obama years. Housing prices continue to rise. So does worker productivity. Teen pregnancy rates just hit record lows, and abortion rates are also the lowest they've been since the data started being tracked.

So, what is not to like in the direction the country is going? I guess that from the perspective of a person who is a big fan of abortion, crime, deficits, and poverty, we're heading in a terrible direction. But, for those of us who are sane, what's not to like?
 
The faithful water carrier arrives at last!
Now that you've gotten that bit of name-calling out of the way, care to respond substantively? If you think the country is headed in the wrong direction, can you identify the particular factors where you think things are getting worse? And do you believe those factors are more important than the collective importance of all those factors that are demonstrably getting better?
 
Well, let's look at that direction. The stock market is higher today than it was at the end of last year. The most recent year's Census figures showed rising median real incomes, falling poverty rates, and a growing share of Americans covered by health insurance. The deficit fell by about $31 billion between FY 2013 and FY 2014. The rate at which Americans have been KIA has fallen by half in the last year. Preliminary FBI data suggests murder and violent crime rates have continued to fall, as they have throughout the Obama years. Housing prices continue to rise. So does worker productivity. Teen pregnancy rates just hit record lows, and abortion rates are also the lowest they've been since the data started being tracked.

So, what is not to like in the direction the country is going? I guess that from the perspective of a person who is a big fan of abortion, crime, deficits, and poverty, we're heading in a terrible direction. But, for those of us who are sane, what's not to like?

Once again, you're displaying your belief that you're smarter than 7 out of 10 Americans... although to be truthful, in YOUR mind you're probably smarter than 99.9%....

Ok. We got it. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/27/politics/cnn-poll-angry-voters/index.html

Nearly 7 in 10 Americans are angry at the direction the country is headed and 53% of Americans disapprove of President Barack Obama's job performance, two troubling signs for Democrats one week before the midterm elections, a new CNN/ORC International Poll shows.

Should make for some interesting outcomes in the midterms.



on an individual level, they're probably angry about their stagnant wages, yet half of them will vote for "cheap labor" republicans and not make the connection.
 
on an individual level, they're probably angry about their stagnant wages, yet half of them will vote for "cheap labor" republicans and not make the connection.

This may be the dumbest thing I've read all day. If their wages are stagnant after 6 years of Obama (which they are), why would it be a mistake to try to change that?
 
Now that you've gotten that bit of name-calling out of the way, care to respond substantively? If you think the country is headed in the wrong direction, can you identify the particular factors where you think things are getting worse? And do you believe those factors are more important than the collective importance of all those factors that are demonstrably getting better?

He won't. He'll just run away like they always do after lobby a personal attack.
 
Well, let's look at that direction. The stock market is higher today than it was at the end of last year. The most recent year's Census figures showed rising median real incomes, falling poverty rates, and a growing share of Americans covered by health insurance. The deficit fell by about $31 billion between FY 2013 and FY 2014. The rate at which Americans have been KIA has fallen by half in the last year. Preliminary FBI data suggests murder and violent crime rates have continued to fall, as they have throughout the Obama years. Housing prices continue to rise. So does worker productivity. Teen pregnancy rates just hit record lows, and abortion rates are also the lowest they've been since the data started being tracked.

So, what is not to like in the direction the country is going? I guess that from the perspective of a person who is a big fan of abortion, crime, deficits, and poverty, we're heading in a terrible direction. But, for those of us who are sane, what's not to like?

The most recent year's Census figures showed rising median real incomes, falling poverty rates, and a growing share of Americans covered by health insurance. The deficit fell by about $31 billion between FY 2013 and FY 2014.

BULLSHIT!

This is a hokum and bunkum numbers game. Rising Median Incomes...not in real dollars buddy..falling poverty rates...based on the very same phony dollar number amounts! So a man gets a dollar an hour raise but then loses eighty bucks a week to inflation and C O L..... pahleese stop with the water carrying ARK.....get out to your local low income neighbor hoods...yeah the lefty ones and then Ask real people how they feel about money, bills and wealth. Try it buddy... I do it all the time! These are democratic voters btw!

The Reality of the matter is that poverty is on the rise as is evidences by the explosion of both unemployed and employed HOMELESS people. Personal wealth is diminishing at a break neck pace and both inflation and cost of living have run away in the face of government claims that inflation is actually at a healthy pace. Total and complete Bullshit.

Keep spouting left wing talking points ARK....it will cost you and all the left every election from now until they start telling the truth that people are living every day not the truth that comes out of the DNC talking points memo.
 
Last edited:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/27/politics/cnn-poll-angry-voters/index.html

Nearly 7 in 10 Americans are angry at the direction the country is headed and 53% of Americans disapprove of President Barack Obama's job performance, two troubling signs for Democrats one week before the midterm elections, a new CNN/ORC International Poll shows.

Should make for some interesting outcomes in the midterms.



Many in this country are finally waking up and realizing that it IS important to elect people for the content of their character. And I believe next Tuesday's election will be a referendum on that mistake.

vdkznvk-116971252226_xlarge.jpeg
 
I think the poll must be pretty accurate. Among my friends and acquaintances, their responses are the same--nobody likes the direction the country is going.

Yeah, I kinda miss those wonderful conditions GWB left behind. Obama sure has messed things up.

;-)
 
Once again, you're displaying your belief that you're smarter than 7 out of 10 Americans... although to be truthful, in YOUR mind you're probably smarter than 99.9%....

Ok. We got it. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
I'm smarter than a whole lot more than 7 out of 10 Americans. 99.9% is a conservative estimate. But, my arrogance notwithstanding, one doesn't have to think one is smarter than most Americans to disagree with most Americans. I think every single person in this forum is out-of-step with most Americans on at least a few issues. For example, about 72% of Americans disapprove of the Republicans in Congress. The vast majority of Americans believe gun laws should either be kept as they are or made more strict, yet a number of people in this forum think they should be made less strict -- a view they share with only 13% of other Americans. Some here are against abortion in all circumstances -- a position held by only 21% of Americans. Some are Baptists -- an affiliation shared with only 15% of Americans. Being out of step with Americans on a question isn't a sign that one thinks one is smarter than all those who disagree.
 
This may be the dumbest thing I've read all day. If their wages are stagnant after 6 years of Obama (which they are), why would it be a mistake to try to change that?
Average hourly earnings have been growing faster than inflation for a couple years now. They bottomed out in October 2012, at $10.17 (in 1982-84 dollars) and now are $10.32. As with most indicators, this one shows America moving in the right direction. It will take a while to completely erase the impact of the financial crisis on hourly earnings, but we certainly wouldn't want to go back to the kind of earnings free-fall we had in mid-2008.
 
Your video is a clip from an oldies movie, Network, I watched it just a few weeks ago on cable. The actor/ guy(Peter Finch) was having a nervous break down on the air. Several other famous actors are also in it.
-----
A television network cynically exploits a deranged former anchor's ravings and revelations about the news media for its own profit.
Director:
Sidney Lumet
Writer:
Paddy Chayefsky
Stars:
Faye Dunaway, William Holden, Peter Finch | See full cast and crew »

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074958/?ref_=nmbio_mbio

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002075/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm
 
Last edited:
Many in this country are finally waking up and realizing that it IS important to elect people for the content of their character. And I believe next Tuesday's election will be a referendum on that mistake.

vdkznvk-116971252226_xlarge.jpeg
There's no evidence at all Obama was elected because of the color of his skin. There have been quite a few black people who have run for the presidency, and before Obama, every single one of them put up a truly abysmal showing. Alan Keyes, for example, was a laughing stock. Herman Cain didn't win a single primary. Carol Mosley Braun and Al Sharpton made barely a ripple. Jesse Jackson's showing was the only one before Obama that was marginally respectable, and he was never really in the running. Never before Obama did Americans show any desire to elect a black man president because of the color of his skin. In fact, in the very long history of American democracy, no black person had EVER come anywhere close to winning a major party presidential nomination, much less the presidency. It was an unbroken line of white people going all the way back to George Washington. And blacks were also under-represented in governorships, the House, and the Senate... and remain so today. In fact, very few blacks have served in major elected office of any sort, outside of mayoral positions. Most of the black people who've been significant political figures have been appointees, where they never had to compete for votes in a white-favoring electorate.

It takes a special sort of racist to look at that history and imagine that somehow Obama rode his race to the presidency.

The reason Obama won has a little to do with his personal charisma, intelligence, and message. And it has a whole lot to do with the fact Bush got his way and it led to an unprecedented, across-the-board national disaster, and neither Mitt Romney nor John McCain could articulate how their policies would differ from Bush's. As polls showed in early 2008, if Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic primary (as she very nearly did), she'd have beaten the snot out of McCain, too. The vote for Obama was mostly a vote against the Republicans, and race made very little difference. If you want more evidence, look at Obama's dominating performance among racial minorities who had no candidate in that election: Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, and Arabs, for example. For them, they weren't able to vote for one of their own, nor was there any "white guilt" to drive their vote, yet they backed Obama by gigantic majorities. The only major group that didn't back him that way were whites, who preferred the white options in 2008 and 2012.
 
There's no evidence at all Obama was elected because of the color of his skin. There have been quite a few black people who have run for the presidency, and before Obama, every single one of them put up a truly abysmal showing. Alan Keyes, for example, was a laughing stock. Herman Cain didn't win a single primary. Carol Mosley Braun and Al Sharpton made barely a ripple. Jesse Jackson's showing was the only one before Obama that was marginally respectable, and he was never really in the running. Never before Obama did Americans show any desire to elect a black man president because of the color of his skin. In fact, in the very long history of American democracy, no black person had EVER come anywhere close to winning a major party presidential nomination, much less the presidency. It was an unbroken line of white people going all the way back to George Washington. And blacks were also under-represented in governorships, the House, and the Senate... and remain so today. In fact, very few blacks have served in major elected office of any sort, outside of mayoral positions. Most of the black people who've been significant political figures have been appointees, where they never had to compete for votes in a white-favoring electorate.

It takes a special sort of racist to look at that history and imagine that somehow Obama rode his race to the presidency.

The reason Obama won has a little to do with his personal charisma, intelligence, and message. And it has a whole lot to do with the fact Bush got his way and it led to an unprecedented, across-the-board national disaster, and neither Mitt Romney nor John McCain could articulate how their policies would differ from Bush's. As polls showed in early 2008, if Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic primary (as she very nearly did), she'd have beaten the snot out of McCain, too. The vote for Obama was mostly a vote against the Republicans, and race made very little difference. If you want more evidence, look at Obama's dominating performance among racial minorities who had no candidate in that election: Hispanics, Asians, Native Americans, and Arabs, for example. For them, they weren't able to vote for one of their own, nor was there any "white guilt" to drive their vote, yet they backed Obama by gigantic majorities. The only major group that didn't back him that way were whites, who preferred the white options in 2008 and 2012.
Wishful thinking....
 
Back
Top