What the 2012 election taught us

What the 2012 election taught us

There are 10317 comments on the The Washington Post story from Nov 6, 2012, titled What the 2012 election taught us. In it, The Washington Post reports that:

We've been scouring the data for clues as to what we should learn from what happened tonight as President Obama relatively easily claimed a second term.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Washington Post.

Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10959 Jun 19, 2013
Black Rhino wrote:
<quoted text>
Absolutely.
Then the second time it was under scrutiny and not sure if Dubya really won that one.
I doubt Dubya won the second time; and he absolutely lost the first time.
Don Joe

Saint Paul, MN

#10960 Jun 19, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
...
IF YOU DIDN'T PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING FROM SOCIAL SECURITY....
What?? you are opposed to the republican platform??? The GOP states they want to end SS for everyone and give all the money to a few rich guys. Here you are implying those who paid in should get something. What till GOP headquarters hears about this.
Ravianna

Newport, OR

#10961 Jun 19, 2013
The Democrat Party has obviously learned nothing from their past. I mean they supported slavery and segregation and now support something that is much worse, abortion.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10962 Jun 19, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of hard working people are underpaid. Because they're underpaid they can't support themselves in even the most basic way. As long as they can't support themselves they need government assistance. Companies must pay a fair wage or you must pay for their welfare benefits. Simple.
"underpaid" and minimum wage are not the same thing.
And, you're talking to someone who worked for minimum wage more than once. I supported myself. Of course, I had to have room mates and didn't have a lot. But, I worked every day and I rose above minimum wage just by going to work every day and doing what I was paid to do.
Try substituting the word "won't" for the word "can't" in your sentence.
My observations, combined with my first-hand experience is that people making minimum wage are only worth minimum wage, either because they are new to the work force and have not yet proved themselves, or they have already proved themselves to be useless.

Nobody should be forced to pay more for the same useless worker.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10963 Jun 19, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
What?? you are opposed to the republican platform??? The GOP states they want to end SS for everyone and give all the money to a few rich guys. Here you are implying those who paid in should get something. What till GOP headquarters hears about this.
That's why I'm not a Republican, dufus. I just don't understand why you clowns just assume that anyone who disagrees with you is a Republican. In case you're ignorant of this fact, there are more "other" than either you or Republicans.
How the fuck you idiots got the idea that there are only you two in the country, I can't imagine. You really have to be locked in a dark closet for decades to not realize there are more "other" people than either one of you.
IF YOU DIDN'T PAY INTO SOCIAL SECURITY, YOU DON'T GET ANYTHING FROM SOCIAL SECURITY

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10964 Jun 19, 2013
Stoneman wrote:
<quoted text>
Problem with us Conservatives packing up and leaving
Funny... you've been threatening to pack up and leave for five years.

I guess you heard we don't ship welfare and food stamps to Mexico?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10965 Jun 19, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
That's one of the reasons I'm not a Republican anymore.
The population of nonwhites 6 percent!

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10966 Jun 19, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
In 11 different U.S. states today, the number of people on welfare exceeds
REFUTED.

Happy to see you tell the people serving in the US military they are on welfare.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10967 Jun 19, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
michaelsnyder
all one needs to know.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10968 Jun 19, 2013

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#10969 Jun 19, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
If by entitlements you mean social security and medicare it's 37% according to IRS 1040 instructions booklet. They call those 'entitlements' because people pay into them over their working lives. These payments are mandatory and come with the promise of income and health care in retirement.
It's sad when some people want to reduce or take away these benefits so that people like Romney won't have to pay any tax at all. Wealthy people like John McCain should think about voluntarily refusing their SS check,$2,000+ each month, so that those that need it to live on could worry a little less about it.
I mean everything Including Social Security because SCOTUS said in 1960 we have no rights to Social Security because it is a tax as stated in Flemming v Nestor(1960).

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#10970 Jun 19, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Both parties are responsible for stealing the trust fund. I agree that the program should never have been expanded to pay for all of the things it does pay for.
there has never been a Social Security Trust Fund which the SCOTUS confirmed in 1937 in Helvering v. Davis and stated that Social Security taxes are not contributions or savings, but simply taxes, and that Social Security benefits are simply a government spending program, no different than, say, farm price supports. In Clinton's Fiscal year 2000 budget Clinton stated & confirmed there was no Social Security Trust Fund but only in a bookkeeping sense on paper.

As the Clinton administration’s
Fiscal Year 2000 Budget explained it:

These [Trust Fund] balances are available
to finance future benefit payments
and other Trust Fund expenditures—
but only in a bookkeeping
sense.... They do not consist of real
economic assets that can be drawn
down in the future to fund benefits.
Instead, they are claims on the
Treasury that, when redeemed, will
have to be financed by raising taxes,
borrowing from the public, or reducing
benefits or other expenditures.
The existence of large Trust Fund
balances, therefore, does not, by itself,
have any impact on the Government’s
ability to pay benefits.

Social Security’s Sham Guarantee

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/s...

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10971 Jun 20, 2013
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
The population of nonwhites 6 percent!
Perhaps only 6 percent of non-whites support the Constitution. Or, only 6 percent of non-whites aren't Marxist communists. Or, only 6 percent of non-whites aren't enemies of the United States.
I have to ask, why do most minorities join a political party that built itself on treason and lies?

Since you object to the constitution, what is written in the Constitution that you vehemently object to?
hogurs

Donora, PA

#10972 Jun 20, 2013
youtube.com/watch...
Amazing That? it taught you Choice
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#10973 Jun 20, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
1. And, you're talking to someone who worked for minimum wage more than once. I supported myself. Of course, I had to have room mates and didn't have a lot. But, I worked every day and I rose above minimum wage just by going to work every day and doing what I was paid to do.
2. My observations, combined with my first-hand experience is that people making minimum wage are only worth minimum wage, either because they are new to the work force and have not yet proved themselves, or they have already proved themselves to be useless.
Nobody should be forced to pay more for the same useless worker.
1. If you "had to have room mates" you were not supporting yourself.
2. Companies don't keep "useless" workers. The fact is they will pay people as little as possible regardless of their value to the company. In many cases they are forced to do this because of their competitors. That has nothing to do with the value of their employees.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10974 Jun 20, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. If you "had to have room mates" you were not supporting yourself.
2. Companies don't keep "useless" workers. The fact is they will pay people as little as possible regardless of their value to the company. In many cases they are forced to do this because of their competitors. That has nothing to do with the value of their employees.
If you pay your fair share of the rent and food and bills, you're supporting yourself, dumbass. Just because your living standard won't allow an independent dwelling does not mean you're not supporting yourself.
You're not supporting yourself if someone else is paying for your fair share of the rent, food and bills.

Yes, companies keep useless workers on the payroll. The reasons vary. One reason is because a union contract demands it. Another reason is some requirement for there to be an amount of minorities working on some contract. Another reason is the threat of some lawsuit that will inevitably be heard in a court with some radical judge that will rule for the minority regardless of the facts... like the New Haven fire fighters case when Sotomayor ruled that the white race could not benefit because they worked and sacrificed more than some minority race.
Now, we can discuss the class of minimum wage worker we like to call "relatively useless".

“Bullsh*% Detector Enabled”

Since: Dec 08

Brooklyn, New York

#10975 Jun 20, 2013
Don Joe wrote:
<quoted text>I doubt Dubya won the second time; and he absolutely lost the first time.
I didn't really call him the president anyway...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10976 Jun 20, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps only 6 percent of non-whites support the Constitution.
Stick to what you know: bringing lonely truckers to happy ending at the rest area you frequent.

“Constitutionalis t”

Since: Dec 10

Spring, TX

#10977 Jun 20, 2013
Black Rhino wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't really call him the president anyway...
So, you're no different than the people who don't call Obama the president, right? Both of you like ice cream. The only difference between you and, oh, say, David Duke is what flavor ice cream, right?

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#10978 Jun 20, 2013
DBWriter wrote:
Since you object to the constitution, what is written in the Constitution that you vehemently object to?
Why do you continue to insist you have a constitutional right to download kiddie porn?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

2012 Presidential Election Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 min TrumpsBuffoons 1,523,715
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 9 min American Lady 265,457
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Go Trump 240,429
News Trump's repeated claim that he won a 'landslide... 1 hr Go Trump 8,558
News EU on course to renew Russia sanctions barring ... 3 hr Prosperity Fundie... 1
News Trump supporters cheer his combative stance wit... 19 hr inbred Genius 1,557
News Shock poll: 46% of Mississippi GOP would vote t... (Apr '11) 21 hr Wall Street bonus 285
More from around the web