Mitt Romney... 47 percent will vote for Obama "no matter what"

[nathanm]

Gasoline had fallen under $2.00 a gallon when Obama took office.

Hmm..financial crisis or expensive gas. Decisions, decisions.

[Conan71]

Amazing isn't it?  How the candidate can slap them in the face, call them worthless, non-contributors, and they aren't put off by it...

I get the same kind of thing in my family.  A few more items they complain about is the ignorance of the wars we have been getting in (Iraq in particular - they agree with me that we should never have done that), and the plan the Republicans have to dismantle medicare/medicaid - they don't like it.  Or that medicare prescription plan from Baby Bush's time.  All of which are directly from the party of the guy they 'support'....  Absolutely amazing....

They have been supporters of Inhofe, too, since about 1968 (no exaggeration...) and just recently have I started to hear comments to the effect that he should retire and let someone new in....  (to carry on the tradition of graft, corruption, and overall sleaze - my edit).

That's because all three of them know they have contributed plenty and paid plenty in taxes over the years to earn the benefits they now receive. 

I also suspect their superior intellect won't allow them to vote for Obama and his shenanigans. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

That's because all three of them know they have contributed plenty and paid plenty in taxes over the years to earn the benefits they now receive. 

I also suspect their superior intellect won't allow them to vote for Obama and his shenanigans. 

And yet, Romney, Murdoch, and minions STILL call all that an "entitlement".....go figure...


I agree with them, by the way on that point - paying for what they are receiving.  Found this random statement on Social Security and have adopted it as one of my recent mantras - was sent this link about all the bullets the government is buying so Social Security offices can shoot down the rabid protestors that are likely in case of major economic meltdown... (Alex Jones is another one of the Murdochian minions.)

http://www.infowars.com/social-security-administration-to-purchase-174-thousand-rounds-of-hollow-point-bullets/


The bullets are not the point - if you look at paragraph 6, a snarky little lie is made where Watson calls it "Social Security Welfare"....

Of course, it isn't.  And it is not an "entitlement" (whatever that is supposed to be...) 

I paid CASH for my Social Security insurance.  Our benefits are not some kind of charity of handout.

Congressional benefits - premium Federal healthcare, outrageous retirement packages, 67 paid holidays, 3 weeks paid vacation, unlimited paid sick days - not THAT is welfare!!

And anyone has the nerve to call my retirement an "entitlement"

(Like Romney, Rand, et. al.)

[TulsaRufnex]

Gasoline had fallen under $2.00 a gallon when Obama took office.  His energy policy is a disaster.  It's the same as previous administrations: reward your best donors.

So wait... if Obama's policies (reward your best donors) are the same as previous administrations, then maybe you should quit while you're behind.
Bush was supposed to have had the most oil industry friendly administration in history... Obama was supposed to have the most anti-industry friendly administration in history, yet we have higher domestic production under Obama than in previous decades.... funny dat.

Typical childish partisan rhetoric from Tulsa's logic-deficient "Children of the Oil"  

[guido911]

Whew. Dick Morris says Romney would win by 4-5 points if election held today...

[Gaspar]

Whew. Dick Morris says Romney would win by 4-5 points if election held today...

Dick says the damnedest things when you take the panties out of his mouth.

He made the same claim about McCain 4 years ago.  Morris rode to fame on Clinton's coat-tails and he's still trying to ride that pony.  He's inaccurate at best.  There is about 7% of the electorate that will decide this election, and of that 7%, only the ones in a few battleground states really matter, with FL, OH, and NC being the most important. 

There however could very likely be a turnover in some of the other smaller electoral distribution states like NM, CO, and even NV.

Romney is going to lose without a doubt unless he grows a pair, and begins to fight back against the massive negative advertising in those states.  His responses are too measured and dignified.  He's going to have to go Chicago to win and I don't know if he can do that.

[Conan71]

So wait... if Obama's policies (reward your best donors) are the same as previous administrations, then maybe you should quit while you're behind.
Bush was supposed to have had the most oil industry friendly administration in history... Obama was supposed to have the most anti-industry friendly administration in history, yet we have higher domestic production under Obama than in previous decades.... funny dat.

Typical childish partisan rhetoric from Tulsa's logic-deficient "Children of the Oil"  

Sad.  You can't even read your own graphs.  Domestic production was higher around Dec. 2002 than the tail end of your graph.  Highest in decades?  It would help if you even knew how long a decade is. 

Name one policy your messiah has passed which would have led to greater domestic production.

You also have ZERO clue as to how oil exploration and drilling is a long term proposition.  The up-tick in production has more to do with advancing (and controversial) technology as well as higher oil prices making it more cost effective to frack, horizontal drill, and use steam extraction techniques.

[Conan71]

Dick says the damnedest things when you take the panties out of his mouth.

He made the same claim about McCain 4 years ago.  Morris rode to fame on Clinton's coat-tails and he's still trying to ride that pony.  He's inaccurate at best.  There is about 7% of the electorate that will decide this election, and of that 7%, only the ones in a few battleground states really matter, with FL, OH, and NC being the most important. 

There however could very likely be a turnover in some of the other smaller electoral distribution states like NM, CO, and even NV.

Romney is going to lose without a doubt unless he grows a pair, and begins to fight back against the massive negative advertising in those states.  His responses are too measured and dignified.  He's going to have to go Chicago to win and I don't know if he can do that.

Morris was also predicting in late '07 that Hillary would be the very clear Democrat nominee.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You also have ZERO clue as to how oil exploration and drilling is a long term proposition.  The up-tick in production has more to do with advancing (and controversial) technology as well as higher oil prices making it more cost effective to frack, horizontal drill, and use steam extraction techniques.

Here - this will help with the history for the two of you.


As for long term proposition - well, you forgot the most important thing - the intentional withholding of about 3/4 of the available leaseholds and proven reserves from exploration and production.  For two complementary reasons - first, as a semi-conscious effort to "use the other guys oil first", so we keep a kind of savings account thing going.  Second, to make the propaganda point the we need to open up vast new areas for exploration and drilling (ANWAR ??) since we obviously can't produce enough with what we already have available.  Gets people scared so they will vote more 'conservative', which begets more preferential treatment from the friendly guys thereby installed.  Likely even saves some money; if you can scare people into voting for the guys you own, you don't have to spend quite so much on electioneering - they are still expensive, but there is a little bit of discount there....


http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus1&f=a

[Conan71]

Here - this will help with the history for the two of you.


As for long term proposition - well, you forgot the most important thing - the intentional withholding of about 3/4 of the available leaseholds and proven reserves from exploration and production.  For two complementary reasons - first, as a semi-conscious effort to "use the other guys oil first", so we keep a kind of savings account thing going.  Second, to make the propaganda point the we need to open up vast new areas for exploration and drilling (ANWAR ??) since we obviously can't produce enough with what we already have available.  Gets people scared so they will vote more 'conservative', which begets more preferential treatment from the friendly guys thereby installed.  Likely even saves some money; if you can scare people into voting for the guys you own, you don't have to spend quite so much on electioneering - they are still expensive, but there is a little bit of discount there....


http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=pet&s=mcrfpus1&f=a

You ruined your credibility as you left out:

"Baby Bush"
"RWRE"
"Murdochian"

[Gaspar]

You ruined your credibility as you left out:

"Baby Bush"
"RWRE"
"Murdochian"

I also noted no mention of the Koch brothers.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You ruined your credibility as you left out:

"Baby Bush"
"RWRE"
"Murdochian"

??


While Baby Bush's family made most of their fortune from oil related activities in concert with the Bin Laden family, they weren't really the main players in this particular area - they are beneficiaries to that form of corporate welfare.

RWRE is more a political, religious movement that has oil as one of its articles of faith, but not the main goal - I see it more as a financial benefit item.

Murdoch - well we all see what he is and while he, too, is a beneficiary at some level, he is not likely directly concerned with oil policy, but more of a cheerleader to those who are.  He is more a political entity.

Koch - see "Baby Bush" above...along with RWRE leanings.

[Conan71]

??


While Baby Bush's family made most of their fortune from oil related activities in concert with the Bin Laden family, they weren't really the main players in this particular area - they are beneficiaries to that form of corporate welfare.

RWRE is more a political, religious movement that has oil as one of its articles of faith, but not the main goal - I see it more as a financial benefit item.

Murdoch - well we all see what he is and while he, too, is a beneficiary at some level, he is not likely directly concerned with oil policy, but more of a cheerleader to those who are.  He is more a political entity.

Koch - see "Baby Bush" above...along with RWRE leanings.

That's better.

[heironymouspasparagus]

That's better.

Sidebar.

[nathanm]

The up-tick in production has more to do with advancing (and controversial) technology as well as higher oil prices making it more cost effective to frack, horizontal drill, and use steam extraction techniques.

Yet somehow people still claim that Obama has somehow kneecapped the industry. Odd, that. You'd think that the President who had declining production during his years in office would be accused of such, but not in upside down world.