Less than 50% say Obama should be re-elected.

I thought this was a unemployment / under employed / job advocacy/support board , not a Democratic campaign board, it's obvious who you going to vote for , and anyone who disagrees with you is just wrong , at least STAN is blaming both sides not just one ! keep drinking grape koolaid , you'll get purple lips , or in other words keep trying the same thing over and over see if you get a different result ! Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , same ole faces , same ole games ! You decide!!!

Chit check me on the music thread. IT AIN T WORTH IT!!

nuttin2lose wrote:SJ N CHIT Play nice now!!

yes sir I was just generalizing, it was not directed at any one member....FYI

UPCHITCREEK wrote:I thought this was a unemployment / under employed / job advocacy board , not a Democratic campaign board, it's obvious who you going to vote for , and anyone who disagrees with you is just wrong , at least STAN is blaming both sides not just one ! keep drinking grape koolaid , you'll get purple lips , or in other words keep trying the same thing over and over see if you get a different result ! Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , same ole faces , same ole games ! You decide!!!

If you don't like my posts, you can move onto another thread. We've had this conservation before. You can't control what people talk about. Not through laughing at them, not through waving your little flag, or by ganging up on people with your buddies. Read your own advice.

If you'd like to join the conversation, I welcome it. Take what you can and leave the rest.

UPCHITCREEK wrote:I thought this was a unemployment / under employed / job advocacy board , not a Democratic campaign board, it's obvious who you going to vote for , and anyone who disagrees with you is just wrong , at least STAN is blaming both sides not just one ! keep drinking grape koolaid , you'll get purple lips , or in other words keep trying the same thing over and over see if you get a different result ! Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , same ole faces , same ole games ! You decide!!!

SEEING SOMEONE TYPING IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS IS INCREDIBLY ANNOYING AND HARD TO READ!!!! If he won't concern himself with making his disagreement in a reasonably mature (not to mention legible) fashion, I won't concern myself with entertaining it.

I'm certainly not denying both sides for the most part suck, and yes, Obama is a giant pansy when it comes to going for the throat and pressuring congress to get stuff done. I totally get it. That being said, I'm definitely still voting for him because voting in a republican will assuredly only make things worse for the have-nots.

You know what, though, I'll humor you: you don't want me to "keep trying the same thing over and over" and expect a different result, so tell me what you think I should do differently? Vote in a republican? Well, if that's the case, you're damn right we won't be getting the same result. The result will be much, MUCH worse.

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:I thought this was a unemployment / under employed / job advocacy board , not a Democratic campaign board, it's obvious who you going to vote for , and anyone who disagrees with you is just wrong , at least STAN is blaming both sides not just one ! keep drinking grape koolaid , you'll get purple lips , or in other words keep trying the same thing over and over see if you get a different result ! Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , same ole faces , same ole games ! You decide!!!

SEEING SOMEONE TYPING IN ALL CAPS LIKE THIS IS INCREDIBLY ANNOYING AND HARD TO READ!!!! If he won't concern himself with making his disagreement in a reasonably mature (not to mention legible) fashion, I won't concern myself with entertaining it.

I'm certainly not denying both sides for the most part suck, and yes, Obama is a giant pansy when it comes to going for the throat and pressuring congress to get stuff done. I totally get it. That being said, I'm definitely still voting for him because voting in a republican will assuredly only make things worse for the have-nots.

You know what, though, I'll humor you: you don't want me to "keep trying the same thing over and over" and expect a different result, so tell me what you think I should do differently? Vote in a republican? Well, if that's the case, you're damn right we won't be getting the same result. The result will be much, MUCH worse.

Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , on both sides!!!

SJ Just bout hadda nuff from this Tara. There is NO way she is livin our lives. Im worried bout where I m gonna live next month. Political views don t mean a DAMN thing to me anymore. Jane Cik If I ve gone too far here pm me and we will take it from there.

Tara wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:I thought this was a unemployment / under employed / job advocacy board , not a Democratic campaign board, it's obvious who you going to vote for , and anyone who disagrees with you is just wrong , at least STAN is blaming both sides not just one ! keep drinking grape koolaid , you'll get purple lips , or in other words keep trying the same thing over and over see if you get a different result ! Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , same ole faces , same ole games ! You decide!!!

If you don't like my posts, you can move onto another thread. We've had this conservation before. You can't control what people talk about. Not through laughing at them, not through waving your little flag, or by ganging up on people with your buddies. Read your own advice.

If you'd like to join the conversation, I welcome it. Take what you can and leave the rest.

Out of you i'll leave it all , you are so far left it would take 100 years to get you back to the center where you and all of us need to be !

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , on both sides!!!

What fresh faces? What fresh ideas? Qualify this, because I don't see fresh faces or ideas on either side. The only choice it feels like anyone has at the moment is the lesser of two evils, and that's what I'm picking. I want to change it, but have no idea how. I don't shut anyone out because they disagree with me, so please, share some wisdom. I'd love to hear it.

nuttin2lose wrote:SJ Just bout hadda nuff from this Tara. There is NO way she is livin our lives. Im worried bout where I m gonna live next month. Political views don t mean a DAMN thing to me anymore. Jane Cik If I ve gone too far here pm me and we will take it from there.

Gee, nuttin I know you told me recently you don't like me. But, I thought you might have changed your mind, the way you follow me around lately.

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Fresh faces , Fresh idea's , on both sides!!!

What fresh faces? What fresh ideas? Qualify this, because I don't see fresh faces or ideas on either side. The only choice it feels like anyone has at the moment is the lesser of two evils, and that's what I'm picking. I want to change it, but have no idea how. I don't shut anyone out because they disagree with me, so please, share some wisdom. I'd love to hear it.

What fresh faces? I'd like to know too.

we have to vote for , new members of congress every few years , senate / house ,depends on which as to how long , that's where the new faces come in ! be a democrat , be a republican , don't care , change the old faces out ..... the face lifts aren't working anymore!

nuttin2lose wrote:SJ Just bout hadda nuff from this Tara. There is NO way she is livin our lives. Im worried bout where I m gonna live next month. Political views don t mean a DAMN thing to me anymore. Jane Cik If I ve gone too far here pm me and we will take it from there.

SORRY BUMP

Of course we would probably be better off if they all slept through the last 10 years like BYRD did ...... look at all the things that would be different.

UPCHITCREEK wrote:we have to vote for , new members of congress every few years , senate / house ,depends on which as to how long , that's where the new faces come in ! be a democrat , be a republican , don't care , change the old faces out ..... the face lifts aren't working anymore!

I have an idea somewhat similar to this, although I doubt it would ever get enough support to work, as it would require people to do a lot more research then most of them probably care to. In addition, the propaganda machine is very strong in this country and has people focusing on relatively minor issues when choosing who to vote for.

The idea is this: since special interests look at lobbying as an investment, we look at any politician who has received generous campaign contributions from a special interest and in turn voted in line with those interests, and vote them out regardless of other opinions. If you do this often enough, eventually special interests learn that the "investments" they make are showing a smaller return (and possibly costing them money) because once they buy a politician, if that politician "falls in line," so to speak, they're doomed politically (assuming this strategy actually works and garners a lot of support) and can't push for laws to give the special interests a good return on investment since they won't get elected.

Once their investments no longer become worth it, they will stop doing it and then we can start voting for people based on the issues. If it were to work (and let me stress that I really don't think enough people would do this, i.e. a democrat voting in a republican just to teach the democrat a lesson or vice versa), we could have our country back after a time. I'd totally do it, but until enough people show interest in doing the same thing, the choice still boils down to the lesser of two evils.

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:we have to vote for , new members of congress every few years , senate / house ,depends on which as to how long , that's where the new faces come in ! be a democrat , be a republican , don't care , change the old faces out ..... the face lifts aren't working anymore!

I have an idea somewhat similar to this, although I doubt it would ever get enough support to work, as it would require people to do a lot more research then most of them probably care to. In addition, the propaganda machine is very strong in this country and has people focusing on relatively minor issues when choosing who to vote for.

The idea is this: since special interests look at lobbying as an investment, we look at any politician who has received generous campaign contributions from a special interest and in turn voted in line with those interests, and vote them out regardless of other opinions. If you do this often enough, eventually special interests learn that the "investments" they make are showing a smaller return (and possibly costing them money) because once they buy a politician, if that politician "falls in line," so to speak, they're doomed politically (assuming this strategy actually works and garners a lot of support) and can't push for laws to give the special interests a good return on investment since they won't get elected.

Once their investments no longer become worth it, they will stop doing it and then we can start voting for people based on the issues. If it were to work (and let me stress that I really don't think enough people would do this, i.e. a democrat voting in a republican just to teach the democrat a lesson or vice versa), we could have our country back after a time. I'd totally do it, but until enough people show interest in doing the same thing, the choice still boils down to the lesser of two evils.

You are so right ! thats why i say WAKE UP people, before it is really to late , and that is not far off.

better yet RAN , how bout this , every election put a new face in ,vote democrat , vote republican, that way, they will all know it's one term then bye-bye!

UPCHITCREEK wrote:better yet RAN , how bout this , every election put a new face in ,vote democrat , vote republican, that way, they will all know it's one term then bye-bye!

I don't think this will achieve the ultimate goal of being able to vote on issues that matter to us. That is to say, with this idea, we have to vote people out indefinitely, whereas I would prefer it if we only had to vote people out until the special interests decided it was no longer worth "investing," and then take our country back. Not to mention this strategy is too indiscriminate in that it also punishes the rare politician who hasn't been bought, and we definitely want to keep politicians who aren't bought.

EDIT: Another strategy would involve setting limits to donation amounts, the problem with that idea is it's only going to happen in fantasy-land, as the people with the power to change the laws regarding donation limits are the ones who stand to benefit most from not having them.

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:better yet RAN , how bout this , every election put a new face in ,vote democrat , vote republican, that way, they will all know it's one term then bye-bye!

I don't think this will achieve the ultimate goal of being able to vote on issues that matter to us. That is to say, with this idea, we have to vote people out indefinitely, whereas I would prefer it if we only had to vote people out until the special interests decided it was no longer worth "investing," and then take our country back. Not to mention this strategy is too indiscriminate in that it also punishes the rare politician who hasn't been bought, and we definitely want to keep politicians who aren't bought.

Agreed , but it requires research on each one .... if they are doing whats best for America and it's people then ok , but right now all i see from both sides is vote me back in i'm not rich enough yet, i'll promise you the moon but i have no intentions of giving it to you .

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Agreed , but it requires research on each one .... if they are doing whats best for America and it's people then ok , but right now all i see from both sides is vote me back in i'm not rich enough yet, i'll promise you the moon but i have no intentions of giving it to you .

Well if this garnered serious support the first thing you would do is have the united community build a website dedicated to researching and posting all the information regarding campaign contributions and who seems to be most influenced by those contributions. Example: candidate A receives huge donations from big oil, and seems to be pushing for things that benefit big oil. So vote him out!

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Agreed , but it requires research on each one .... if they are doing whats best for America and it's people then ok , but right now all i see from both sides is vote me back in i'm not rich enough yet, i'll promise you the moon but i have no intentions of giving it to you .

Well if this garnered serious support the first thing you would do is have the united community build a website dedicated to researching and posting all the information regarding campaign contributions and who seems to be most influenced by those contributions. Example: candidate A receives huge donations from big oil, and seems to be pushing for things that benefit big oil. So vote him out!

Or unions , wallstreet , ect , ect ......

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Or unions , wallstreet , ect , ect ......

Right, right. Big oil was just an example, but it goes for anything.

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:Or unions , wallstreet , ect , ect ......

Right, right. Big oil was just an example, but it goes for anything.

Thank you , now you kinda know where i stand.


and with that i'll leave this debate to the hard leftist to figure out !

UPCHITCREEK wrote:

RanBrow123 wrote:

UPCHITCREEK wrote:better yet RAN , how bout this , every election put a new face in ,vote democrat , vote republican, that way, they will all know it's one term then bye-bye!

I don't think this will achieve the ultimate goal of being able to vote on issues that matter to us. That is to say, with this idea, we have to vote people out indefinitely, whereas I would prefer it if we only had to vote people out until the special interests decided it was no longer worth "investing," and then take our country back. Not to mention this strategy is too indiscriminate in that it also punishes the rare politician who hasn't been bought, and we definitely want to keep politicians who aren't bought.

Agreed , but it requires research on each one .... if they are doing whats best for America and it's people then ok , but right now all i see from both sides is vote me back in i'm not rich enough yet, i'll promise you the moon but i have no intentions of giving it to you .

Unfortunately, I believe alot of people did exactly that in 2010. They were fed up with the economy, blamed the Democrats and voted in a bunch of Republicans who are way conservative. They're paying the price right now for their folly.

nuttin2lose wrote:SJ Just bout hadda nuff from this Tara. There is NO way she is livin our lives. Im worried bout where I m gonna live next month. Political views don t mean a DAMN thing to me anymore. Jane Cik If I ve gone too far here pm me and we will take it from there.

Ok nuttin, sorry to hear that, I don't feel that way about Tara......

I am in the constant cycle of worry too. Hang in there