What the 2012 election taught us

What the 2012 election taught us

There are 10323 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.

“Free Your Mind”

Since: Nov 12

Tucson

#3127 Nov 24, 2012
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
I wouldn't be so hasty in excluding yourself. People have shown you where you were wrong and have given you websites to show you were wrong.
So maybe it is you who is the blithering idiot and not them, eh?
I'd say the weather vane blows in just such a direction. ;)
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#3128 Nov 24, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>not all loans Dummy Read, you are a blithering idiot, here is another link since you want someone else to provide you with the breakdown instead reading it from the US Treasury's Website.
2008 TARP Funds — Where Are They Now?
How much has been paid back, how much is lost and more
May 23, 2012, 8:38 am EST
http://investorplace.com/2012/05/2008-tarp-fu...
lol! The moron keeps begging for handouts and has no idea he's doing it!

I tell you, the comedy some of these cons provide is just outstanding!
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#3130 Nov 24, 2012
The Congressional Research Service reports explains thoroughly that events leading to the erosion of America's Economy in the 2008 Economic and Financial Collapse created a need with the shredding of American Jobs for additional spending.

That was not unlike the additional Corporate Welfare needs dressed as TARP to save the American Financial System in Oct 2008, and prior to the TARP legislation the Treasury underwriting the loans for Corporations such as AGI, and housing giants Fannie and Freddie.

The Recover Act funding was a one time deal to stable a shaky Financial System and place some kind of bottom on the collapsing American Economy in 2009, considered an extraordinary circumstance. Those actions seems to have worked creating a rebound from a negative 9% shrinkage in Gross Domestic Production in the 4QT 2008.


That explosion in Americans receiving unemployment insurance due to the shredding of jobs by the hundreds of thousands in the months from Sept 2008, to Feb 2009, more than justifies the drain on resources and the increase in social safety net programming. Almost over night self sufficient citizens found themselves through no fault of their own depending on help from the Government they had supported all of their working lives.
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
your ignorance is showing:
CRS Report: Welfare Spending The Largest Item In The Federal Budget
Ranking Member Sessions and the minority staff of the Senate Budget Committee requested from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service (CRS) an overview of cumulative means-tested federal welfare spending in the United States in the most recent year for which data is available (fiscal year 2011). The results are staggering. CRS identified 83 overlapping federal welfare programs that together represented the single largest budget item in 2011—more than the nation spends on Social Security, Medicare, or national defense. The total amount spent on these 80-plus federal welfare programs amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. Importantly, these figures solely refer to means-tested welfare benefits. They exclude entitlement programs to which people contribute (e.g., Social Security and Medicare).
CRS estimates that exclusively federal spending on these federal programs equaled approximately $746 billion, and further emphasizes that there is a substantial amount of state spending—mostly required as a condition of states’ participation—on these same federal programs (primarily Medicaid and CHIP). Based on data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Oxford Handbook of State and Local Government Finance, Budget Committee staff calculated at least an additional $283 billion in state contributions to those same federal programs,[1] for a total annual expenditure of $1.03 trillion. By comparison, in 2011, the annual budget expenditure for Social Security was $725 billion, Medicare was $480 billion, and non-war defense was $540 billion.
The exclusively federal share of spending on these federal programs is up 32 percent since 2008, and now comprises 21 percent of federal outlays (this share too is more than Social Security, Medicare, or defense).
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#3131 Nov 24, 2012
The information contained in this post and from the linked site as posted is hosted by a Conservative Paid Shrill. This information is not legitimate in the least.

A good honest review of the site will present to you the quiet disclaimer such as: Spending: budgeted actual estimated guesstimated2

presented by Christopher Chantrill

Welcome!

WELCOME. I am Christopher Chantrill, writer and conservative. You can see my work at the following sites:
Road to the Middle Class
An American Manifesto
usgovernmentspending.com
usgovernmentdebt.us
usfederalbudget.us
usgovernmentrevenue.com
ukpublicspending.co.uk
American Thinker

Anyone familiar with "American Thinker" ?

This verifies your inability to review data that is not partisan and come up with your own thoughts and non biased understanding of fiscal data.

You pretty much repeat what you are told to repeat.
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't count state and local, fed only:
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/welfare_b...
The source is impeccable, you don't know wtf ur talking about
Spending FY 2010 11 12 13 14 15
Welfare 565.2 471.5 438.5 408.5 403.3 396.7
[+] Family and children 99.3 103.5 104.1 102.7 101.0 99.1
[+] Unemployment 194.3 106.6 81.7 76.9 72.7 68.8
[+] Unemployment trust 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
[+] Workers compensation 8.0 6.9 7.2 8.5 9.5 10.5
[+] Housing 77.0 64.1 57.4 53.3 52.3 50.0
[+] Social exclusion n.e.c. 186.8 190.3 188.1 167.2 167.8 168.2
[+] R&D Social protection 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
[+] Social protection n.e.c. 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.
Let's hear your lame rebuttal to the facts
Brad

Manchester, CT

#3132 Nov 24, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the fact that you buy into such BS at all, sows you ave no idea what you are talkin about on these issues. Keep parroting tings you don't understand......
It sows I ave?
LOL

Okay Ms. Kettle.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3133 Nov 24, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! The moron keeps begging for handouts and has no idea he's doing it!
I tell you, the comedy some of these cons provide is just outstanding!
exactly.
simple question

Farmington, MO

#3135 Nov 24, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>This might help:

, Budget Deficits
http://www.fms.treas.gov/index.html
2002 FY Budget Deficit $158 Billion
2003 FY Budget Deficit $365 Billion
2004 FY Budget Deficit $412 Billion
2005 FY Budget Deficit $319 Billion
2006 FY Budget Deficit $248 Billion
2007 FY Budget Deficit $161 Billion
2008 FY Budget Deficit $455 Billion <---- Democrats control Congress
2009 FY Budget Deficit $1.4 Trillion
2010 FY Budget Deficit $1.3 Trillion
2011 FY Budget Deficit $1.6 Trillion
2012 FY budget deficit $1.3 trillion

2013 FY budget est.$1.1 trillion

Most would say Obama and the dems have added $5 trillion, so far.
Nope, that doesn't address my question at all.

I'm sorry, I thought I phrased it in a simple enough way?

Deficit spending has nothing to do with my question.

How much more in $$$ or as a percent, if you prefer, has this administration spent than the previous one?
Hates Ignorance

Butler, PA

#3136 Nov 24, 2012

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3137 Nov 24, 2012
Brad wrote:
<quoted text>
It sows I ave?
LOL
Okay Ms. Kettle.
Still having issues with my g and h keys.

if callingg out typos is all you hhave, again, you really shouldn't be discussing these issues.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#3138 Nov 24, 2012
Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
Coming from a teabagger,it doesn't.
As of December 2008, President George W. Bush had vetoed only 12 bills since taking office in January 2001. Only one Presidential veto occurred before Democrats took control of Congress in January 2007. This is the fewest Presidential vetoes of any modern President; in March 2006 Bush set a 200-year veto record. Source: US Senate.
Great Post,

He was trying to propose that the democrats didn't take the majority in the 110th until 2008 instead of Jan 2007. Reason being the 2007 FY was the least damage done by the wreck-less spending agenda of George Bush and the Republicans.

Also, he's either lying as I suspect he is, or ignorant of how congress works, George Bush after the Democrats won the majority in Nov 2006 shut the democrats out completely and voted every proposal that included any spending request that came across his desk, further more Bush used the Troop Emergency Spending Bills to load up with spending and pork projects the Republican sought. The democrats hands were tied, if they objected to the bills they were seen as Anit-Troop and labeled as non supportive of our troops.

The very same way the Republicans are riding the deaths of our Ambassador, George Bush and the Republicans in congress from 2002, paraded the dead troops from Afghanistan and Iraq to blast deficits through the roof.

http://www.fms.treas.gov/index.html
2002 FY Budget Deficit $158 Billion
2003 FY Budget Deficit $365 Billion
2004 FY Budget Deficit $412 Billion
2005 FY Budget Deficit $319 Billion
2006 FY Budget Deficit $248 Billion
2007 FY Budget Deficit $161 Billion
2008 FY Budget Deficit $455 Billion <---- Democrats control Congress
2009 FY Budget Deficit $1.4 Trillion
2010 FY Budget Deficit $1.3 Trillion
2011 FY Budget Deficit $1.6 Trillion
2012 FY budget deficit $1.3 trillion
2013 FY budget est.$1.1 trillion
Most would say Obama and the dems have added $5 trillion, so far.

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#3139 Nov 24, 2012
President Obama has "spent" more than all of the other presidents combined in only four yrs.
Eric Gustafson

Newport News, VA

#3140 Nov 24, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! The moron keeps begging for handouts and has no idea he's doing it!
I tell you, the comedy some of these cons provide is just outstanding!
The Tea Bags position has always been that some citizens are more deserving of the largess than others.

You got an idea when they were staging those mock protest at the capital. The crowd demanding that the government keep their hands off of their Medicare. After witnessing those protest any one with better than a 4th Grade understanding of American Civics understood this Tea Party was a sham lead by Dick Army. Sort of the Pied Piper style.

“Liberal Teachers ruin Kids”

Since: Mar 09

Paradise Valley Arizona

#3141 Nov 24, 2012
Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern-Day Tea Party Movement

1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics
10. Maintain Local Independence

“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.”--Abraham Lincoln

“Honesty is the best policy.”--Benjamin Franklin

Anyone who thinks that the Tea Party is something bad is a complete and utter fool.
The Tea Party only wants whats best for we the people.

Since: Feb 12

Location hidden

#3142 Nov 24, 2012
Vance1 wrote:
Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern-Day Tea Party Movement
1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics
10. Maintain Local Independence
“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.”--Abraham Lincoln
“Honesty is the best policy.”--Benjamin Franklin
Anyone who thinks that the Tea Party is something bad is a complete and utter fool.
The Tea Party only wants whats best for we the people.
How the tea party is like communism

September 23, 2010 12:00 am • By Bill Zollweg | Galesville

Here are five similarities between the Republican tea party and communist totalitarians:

• Both argue for the smallest possible size of government. Both want government to be fundamentally local with little to no input from a centralized federal government.

• Both argue that employment should be local and involve the area workers. In communism, the term is decapitalization of labor and in the tea party, the term is domestic employment.

• Both argue that the only interests that should influence the government are the interests of local citizens.

• Both argue for the lowest possible tax on individual incomes. Both see taxes as a tribute extracted from the citizen by law, with no real legitimacy.

• Both argue for citizen politicians. Both see the politicians as elitists, who has interests only in maintaining their elite status. Both want the “average man” to be the political person, and at the local level.

The people of the tea party fail to realize these totalitarian positions. In the 1940s, C. Wright Mills pointed out that inevitably smaller government results in more “concentrated power.” Therefore, if power in the hands of fewer people is want you want, the tea party is for you.

Another great American philosopher said that the communist revolution would come from the patriotic conservative. Locally, we have Mike Huebsch, Dan Kapanke, Ron Johnson and Scott Walker as suitable tea party representatives. It’s time to wake up and return to sanity.

http://lacrossetribune.com/news/opinion/how-t...
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#3143 Nov 24, 2012
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
The Tea Bags position has always been that some citizens are more deserving of the largess than others.
You got an idea when they were staging those mock protest at the capital. The crowd demanding that the government keep their hands off of their Medicare. After witnessing those protest any one with better than a 4th Grade understanding of American Civics understood this Tea Party was a sham lead by Dick Army. Sort of the Pied Piper style.
Yep. The problem for the tea-p is they're a diverse group. They're more than willing to rein in anyone's spending.... as long as it's not theirs.

Then it becomes a "right" you're intruding on.

It's amazing how they have different words for the same things depending on the party
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#3144 Nov 24, 2012
Vance1 wrote:
Ten Core Beliefs of the Modern-Day Tea Party Movement
1. Eliminate Excessive Taxes
2. Eliminate the National Debt
3. Eliminate Deficit Spending
4. Protect Free Markets
5. Abide by the Constitution of the United States
6. Promote Civic Responsibility
7. Reduce the Overall Size of Government
8. Believe in the People
9. Avoid the Pitfalls of Politics
10. Maintain Local Independence
“This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it.”--Abraham Lincoln
“Honesty is the best policy.”--Benjamin Franklin
Anyone who thinks that the Tea Party is something bad is a complete and utter fool.
The Tea Party only wants whats best for we the people.
lol! I heard there are nearly 5000 of these "organizations" about a year ago. And no one seems to be able to get a handler of what they stand for.

Clearly a disorganized bunch of radicals....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

"... The findings suggest that the breadth of the tea party may be inflated. The Atlanta-based Tea Party Patriots, for example, says it has a listing of more than 2,300 local groups, but The Post was unable to identify anywhere near that many, despite help from the organization and independent research.
ad_icon

In all, The Post identified more than 1,400 possible groups and was able to verify and reach 647 of them. Each answered a lengthy questionnaire about their beliefs, members and goals. The Post tried calling the others as many as six times. It is unclear whether they are just hard to reach or don't exist.

Mark Meckler, a founding member of the Tea Party Patriots, said: "When a group lists themselves on our Web site, that's a group. That group could be one person, it could be 10 people, it could come in and out of existence - we don't know. We have groups that I know are 15,000 people, and I have groups that I know are five people." ...."

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#3145 Nov 24, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>lol! I heard there are nearly 5000 of these "organizations" about a year ago. And no one seems to be able to get a handler of what they stand for.
Clearly a disorganized bunch of radicals....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...
"... The findings suggest that the breadth of the tea party may be inflated. The Atlanta-based Tea Party Patriots, for example, says it has a listing of more than 2,300 local groups, but The Post was unable to identify anywhere near that many, despite help from the organization and independent research.
ad_icon
In all, The Post identified more than 1,400 possible groups and was able to verify and reach 647 of them. Each answered a lengthy questionnaire about their beliefs, members and goals. The Post tried calling the others as many as six times. It is unclear whether they are just hard to reach or don't exist.
Mark Meckler, a founding member of the Tea Party Patriots, said: "When a group lists themselves on our Web site, that's a group. That group could be one person, it could be 10 people, it could come in and out of existence - we don't know. We have groups that I know are 15,000 people, and I have groups that I know are five people." ...."
the Tea Party isnt what I call organized yet.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3146 Nov 24, 2012
Hypnotic Phantom wrote:
<quoted text>
People have shown you where you were wrong and have given you websites to show you were wrong.
LOL! So, if you're given "websites", you may as well just pack it in?

In case you haven't noticed, for every website showing someone is "wrong", there's at least one that supports their argument.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#3147 Nov 24, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>I love people who believe management should get 300% raises
Who said management should get 300% raises?

Or maybe I should ask what source claimed Hostess management received "300% raises?

After reading several articles (including those from CNBC and CNN) covering the demise of Hostess, I could find nothing about "300% raises".

How Hostess Failed: Hedge Funds vs. Unions

http://www.cnbc.com/id/49853653/How_Hostess_F...

Caught in a fight between labor and hedge funds, the baker may finally have reached its expiration date.

http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2012/07/26/...

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#3148 Nov 24, 2012
sage won wrote:
Clearly the "concept" was around long before Marx, one of the biggest idiots to ever pick up a pen and put it to paper.
Putting a pen to paper would put him three steps ahead of you.

No one knows your name today and no one will know it when you die. You will be put in a Styrofoam coffin and buried at county expense.

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.

Massachusetts Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Trackers MC Boston? (Apr '13) Jul 22 LUSCIOUS 27
Loglia is a liar Jul 21 Be concerned 1
If there is no God, no heaven or hell...then pl... (Nov '09) Jul 21 John 316
Bourne Wind Turbine Meeting Tonight - Noise Jul 20 Bob Delong 1
News Gingrich: Mitt Romney is a liar (Jan '12) Jul 18 Swedenforever 77
Taxpayers Screwed: New Bedford Marine Commerce ... Jul 16 Bob Delong 1
News Wal-Mart accused of same-sex bias in class-acti... Jul 14 Fa-Foxy 3
More from around the web