Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

So, you're saying you liked the candidate who you agreed with more?

Again, I'm shocked at this revelation.


A democrat who was strongly pro biden might say Ryan came off as an uninformed douche much of the time. That person might point out that Ryan constantly ducked questions when asked directly "can you give us specifics of your plan and how it will work"

These debates are pure fluff and mean very little. Fox news will declare victory or a "tie" for Ryan, and liberal stations will declare victory or a "tie" for Biden.

Then they will all go out and conduct 439874934 opinion polls to determine who "won"


I've finally decided...I'm not voting. It's pointless anyway. No matter who wins, we're fucked. But again, if Romney wins, I guess I'll be thankful...i'll be a whole lot richer.

I don't know why. I think Ryan and Romney have a greater command of fiscal and economic policy -- two things that are central to my concerns this election cycle. Of course I'm going to support those guys since I can't support an administration that has failed to deliver.


But the problem is Ryan is an incredibly smart man. He's not as strong on foreign policy as Biden is, but Ryan knows a great deal of information. Biden, on the other hand, isn't nearly as smart on economic matters as Ryan is. Each man has their strengths and weaknesses, but I feel Ryan is better suited for taking care of issues I care most about.

While that person might point to Ryan ducking a question, I would see it differently. Romney and Ryan have repeatedly said they plan on making their plan work by expanding the tax payer base, repealing ObamaCare, closing tax deductions/loopholes for higher income Americans, and finding other means of trimming unnecessary expenses. The specifics you ask for aren't known because Romney/Ryan think having a debate in the house is the best way to determine which should get cut. That makes perfect sense to me. Our elected officials could fight for what their constituents want, while finding common ground where both sides would be willing to make cuts or concessions. That's part of a bi-partisan process, is it not? I figured it would be a debate worth having and I welcome that process, rather than the closed-door, force-feeding, completely partisan process of ObamaCare. Maybe Romney and Ryan aren't as arrogant as Obama... and I'm fine with that. Remember, Obama is the man that had all the answers and knew how to fix all of our problems, but all his solutions, and the effects of those solutions, have been less than good. In any event, as I've said before, I'd be willing to go with an unproven, less detailed new plan than a proven bad plan, since the former has a chance to not be bad.

Just swinging the pendulum back to the other side. Then it won't work, and it will swing back in the next election. I'm surprised you don't see this.


Also, raising the military budget seems absurd to me. Why do we need to do that? Our foreign policy would go back to shit, like it was in the bush years.

Also, what do you think about unemployment being back down to what it was? Or are you of the Fox News "those numbers are made up" camp?

There's a difference between raising the budget and not cutting the budget.

When has the Obama administration said they were going to cut the military budget?

No one has said that. Romney has clearly said he wants to raise the budget.

Oh and for the record - the military budget should be cut.

It's fucking absurd and unnecessary. But no politician will ever do it because it's unpopular.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2012/01/obama-defense-cuts/1

http://freebeacon.com/biden-inaccurately-claims-obama-doesnt-want-to-cut-military/



Personally I think they SHOULD cut the military budget, but we need the Navy. Protect the trade routes, its the most effective way the president CAN help the economy. Cut it elsewhere.

Watching Eturnal playing mental gymnastics with himself is pretty entertaining.

EDIT: Protect the trade routes? I wasn't aware that piracy was a big deal anymore.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

I'm still laughing at Ryan's hair flip.

"Hey guys, look at me! I'm the 'cool' kid you all hated WHEN YOU WERE TWELVE."

If destruction exists, we must destroy everything.
Shuruppak Yuratuhl
Slaad Shrpk Breizh

I saw the last 30 seconds or so of the debate and I wanted to punch Ryan in the mouth for continually doing this:

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

Usdk, you are aware that a large portion of our military budget is building tanks we don't need, and also making sure retired generals (who were glorified middle men and did nothing on the field of battle or even close to it) have fat pensions and homes they can live in courtesy of the taxpayers?


Okay, so Obama wants to cut the military budget...that is a good thing. You seem to be worried about the Navy though, why? Do you agree with Ryan that we should go charging into wars with Syria or Iran if they don't listen to us? Do you think diplomacy is a sign of weakness?



He wasn't doing anything...I think that's just how his face looks. Permanent douche.

He would have thrown rocks at Aestu, and he certainly would have picked on a majority of people on this forum. He would have banged Cally and never called her back. This I know.

Iran having a nuclear weapon isn't the end of the world imo. If I was Iran, I'd want a nuclear weapon solely because places like the US will start using kid gloves on me. I mean, look at Pakistan.

Not all presidencies are like Bush's second term and Obama's first.


"Figures don't lie, but liars figure." I don't think the numbers are made up, but I think the methodology in which the numbers are determined is partly to blame for what might be a statistical anomaly. Give it a week or two when all the states actually process and report their quarterly claims numbers. When that happens, economists are saying we'll see a rebound in the jobless numbers since all people should be accounted for. (Keep in mind that some months have seen a drop in the unemployment rate not due to the job gains, but by a reduction in the civilian labor force which outpaced any gains.)

Shouldn't even be an issue, guys. Remember when Obama's Council of Economic Advisors said the passage of the stimulus package would hold the unemployment level at 8%? How wrong they were...


We get it. Thinking is too hard for you.


/facepalm


It's hard to take you seriously when you say shit like this, because I heard him explicitly say the opposite of this, "Nobody is proposing to send [American] troops to Syria." Misinformation, like this, is part of the problem. As Ryan said, to quote President Obama, "If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."

Yes, he is not proposing we send troops to Syria or Iran. However, he also said that our current administrations diplomacy tactics make us look weak and are not in the best interests of national security. He said that our national security is the highest priority.

So, do I think he will go charging into war? No. But he seems to think that working with the UN on sanctions and working with our allies is not in America's best interests.

"If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from."

-You are aware that this is exactly what the republicans are doing as well. Do you remember the 2004 election? What was that tactic? They used 9/11 and the threat of terrorist attack to get people to vote for bush. I remember getting pieces of mail with pictures from 9/11 and spooky writing about how Kerry would not be strong against terrorists. Surely, you remember this?

So, you were misrepresenting his words when you said he wanted to charge into wars?


He didn't say, "FUCK DIPLOMACY! LET'S START A WAR!" He's said our current approach to diplomacy isn't working. He said he wanted to identify the people within the country that are fighting against Asad and work with them, along with our few friends in the middle east, to have a change of diplomatic approach. More of an influence from neighbors, rather than just letting tens of thousands of Syrians die in the streets. The reason he said it's a national security threat is because of the friendship between Iran and the Assad regime.

You did watch the debate, right?


If your example of the Republicans currently using a tactic refers to a campaign eight years ago, I think you're doing it wrong. Perhaps you can pull something from this election cycle instead.