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.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2690 Nov 20, 2012
Eric Gustafson wrote:
urrrrr, Declining Economic Growth, declining which caused the shrinking of the American labor rate to the tune of 8 million jobs being outsourced, ending with a Negative -9% GDP in 4Q 2008 and the fundamental crashing of the American Economy and Financial System, leading to the historic TARP Legislation.
<quoted text>
Our economy is constantly going up and down, you have offered no proof Bush was any worse than any other president and of course you deny the ill effects of 9/11 Bush hAD TO DEAL with.

I have offered ample proof the democrats caused the housing bubble and the ensuing crash.

You idiots constantly claim republicans don't care about the workers or jobs, when nothing could be further from the truth. Without a prosperous working and middle class, how do you think the rich can make any money?

The dems do it thru borrowed money, right now we're creating a deficit bubble which of course will crash, as do all bubbles. Then you'll see never before seen inflation and stagnation of the economy.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2691 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrelevant, el stupido. No sub prime mortgages no mortgage meltdown, deny it and look like a bigger fool.
Democrat coercion of the banks to give loans to unqualified minorities drove housing prices up unrealistically causing a bubble which of course had to crash.
Clinton, dumbass:
"
But others would note the irony of Clinton citing the perils of deregulation under Bush because he also is culpable. Clinton signed into law a repeal of the Glass-Steagall law that separated commercial and investment banks — a policy shift that some have said also played a role in the economic crisis. Moreover, Clinton also signed into law the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which essentially removed derivatives contracts from regulatory oversight. By many accounts, derivatives, such as the credit default swap, were at the heart of the financial crisis.
Indeed, Clinton has admitted that he was given wrong advice about the need to regulate derivatives contracts.“I think they were wrong, and I think I was wrong to take” their advice, Clinton said of his economic advisers."
You don't know wtf ur talking about.
keep posting you are looking like a bigger fool and there is no denying it.
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#2692 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Irrelevant, el stupido. No sub prime mortgages no mortgage meltdown, deny it and look like a bigger fool.
Democrat coercion of the banks to give loans to unqualified minorities drove housing prices up unrealistically causing a bubble which of course had to crash.
Clinton, dumbass:
"
But others would note the irony of Clinton citing the perils of deregulation under Bush because he also is culpable. Clinton signed into law a repeal of the Glass-Steagall law that separated commercial and investment banks — a policy shift that some have said also played a role in the economic crisis. Moreover, Clinton also signed into law the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which essentially removed derivatives contracts from regulatory oversight. By many accounts, derivatives, such as the credit default swap, were at the heart of the financial crisis.
Indeed, Clinton has admitted that he was given wrong advice about the need to regulate derivatives contracts.“I think they were wrong, and I think I was wrong to take” their advice, Clinton said of his economic advisers."
You don't know wtf ur talking about.
lol! Unlike you son, there are qualitative and factual sources of information you prefer to ignore.

Cons are so stupid. And they remain that way by choice.

http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_pa...

"...Timing and originations

Before we turn to our analysis of CRA lending data, we have two important points to note regarding the CRA and its possible connection to the current mortgage crisis.

The first point is a matter of timing. The current crisis is rooted in the poor performance of mortgage loans made between 2005 and 2007. If the CRA did indeed spur the recent expansion of the subprime mortgage market and subsequent turmoil, it would be reasonable to assume that some change in the enforcement regime in 2004 or 2005 triggered a relaxation of underwriting standards by CRA-covered lenders for loans originated in the past few years. However, the CRA rules and enforcement process have not changed substantively since 1995.2/ This fact weakens the potential link between the CRA and the current mortgage crisis.

Our second point is a matter of the originating entity. When considering the potential role of the CRA in the current mortgage crisis, it is important to account for the originating party. In particular, independent nonbank lenders, such as mortgage and finance companies and credit unions, originate a substantial share of subprime mortgages, but they are not subject to CRA regulation and, hence, are not directly influenced by CRA obligations.(We explore subprime mortgage originations in further detail below.)

The CRA may directly affect nonbank subsidiaries or affiliates of banking institutions. Banking institutions can elect to have their subsidiary or affiliate lending activity counted in CRA performance evaluations. If the banking institution elects to include affiliate activity, it cannot be done selectively. For example, the institution cannot "cherry pick" loans that would be favorably considered under the law while ignoring loans to middle- or higher-income borrowers...."

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2693 Nov 20, 2012
Yeah wrote:
<quoted text>And the subprime issue was a capitalistic one son!
Probably because we're not China or Cuba, you doddering old Depends wearing fool.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2694 Nov 20, 2012
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
So you believe that Papa Johns pays premium wages and provides comprehensive health care to his employees?
ROFLMAO........ don't be so gullible.
Fact of the matter is under the mandate it's a net savings to pay the find on low income high turn over employees instead of carrying health care insurance in each individual.
That's a no brain decision and a net profit to the organization.
The Arithmetic isn't complicated
Where did I say that?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2695 Nov 20, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>
Community Reinvestment Act
Legislative revision history
Original act 1977
Legislative changes 1989
Legislative changes 1991
Legislative changes 1992
Legislative changes 1994
Regulatory changes 1995
Legislative changes 1999
Regulatory changes 2005
Regulatory changes 2007
Legislative changes 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinve...
Home Ownership and President Bush
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =QYvtvcBKgIQXX
George Bush: we want everybody in America to own their own home. That's what we want.
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
have you noticed that most of CRA changes took place under GHW Bush and G W Bush adminstrations and First Legislative change took place under GHW Bush's Adminstration.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2696 Nov 20, 2012
Eric Gustafson wrote:
<quoted text>
You missed a lot with American politics, George Bush only had 12 vetoes in 8 years, 11 of them in his last 2 years all democrat proposals. True the Democrats were the majority for 2 years, but Bush vetoed every piece of legislation involving spending they sent to him to approve.
There are a lot of holes in your political knowledge base, why?
Also, there's not been an approved Federal Budget since 1996, it's not like George Bush signed any Budgets into law, he just spent by submitting spending proposals to congress which they rubber stamped,
How is it that you people talk a great deal about budgets and spending and are absent the fact there hasn't been a federal budget since 96, just spending request?
If Bush vetoed all these spending bills, then why are idiotic libs on here accusing him of bankrupting us?
Bush had the deficit down to under $200 billion right before the democrat authored mortgage meltdown occurred.
When are you going to admit Bush did a great job of dealing with the economic chaos caused by 9/11 ? Libs act like it never happened.
I will fault Bush for his misplaced "compassionate conservatism", he should have vetoed many more foolish spending bills proposed by both parties.
Of course then libs would have accused him of racism and hating the blacks, the illegals, the mexicans, the poor. You know they would of.
Hates Ignorance

Butler, PA

#2697 Nov 20, 2012
"Indeed, Clinton has admitted that he was given wrong advice about the need to regulate derivatives contracts.“I think they were wrong, and I think I was wrong to take” their advice, Clinton said of his economic advisers."

"You don't know wtf ur talking about.'

At least Democrats can recognize, admit to & learn from mistakes. While the other side denies and stubbornly insists on repeating or doubling down on them.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2698 Nov 20, 2012
barefoot2626 wrote:
<quoted text>
Funny how so many cannot see you "truth" and instead see you as the vile, ignorant, crybaby you are.
Did you see who won the election, child?
I saw over 700 democrats get their slimy asses kicked out in 2010. Douchebag failure Obama barely won re election if you hadn't noticed, imbecile.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2699 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Our economy is constantly going up and down, you have offered no proof Bush was any worse than any other president and of course you deny the ill effects of 9/11 Bush hAD TO DEAL with.
I have offered ample proof the democrats caused the housing bubble and the ensuing crash.
You idiots constantly claim republicans don't care about the workers or jobs, when nothing could be further from the truth. Without a prosperous working and middle class, how do you think the rich can make any money?
The dems do it thru borrowed money, right now we're creating a deficit bubble which of course will crash, as do all bubbles. Then you'll see never before seen inflation and stagnation of the economy.
George W. Bush is widely considered -- by liberals -- to be one of the most politically conservative presidents in history. But many on the right have a different perspective. Among the latter are Bruce Bartlett, a highly respected Republican economist and an alumnus of the Reagan White House, who in 2000 was an eager supporter of George W. Bush (and even helped to craft the President's early tax cuts) but has since become disillusioned by his big-spending, government-expanding ways. Now, in Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy, Bartlett attacks the Bush administration's economic performance root and branch -- showing how Bush has made no effort to restrain the growth of government, greatly increased domestic spending, created a new entitlement program for prescription drugs, failed to veto a single bill, and expanded both the size and scope of government in many ways quite apart from national defense and homeland security. Bartlett also explains why the Bush policies will have serious economic consequences for the country - and possibly fatal political consequences for the GOP.

Highlights of Bruce Bartlett's penetrating critique

Medicare expansion: Why the new "prescription drug benefit" may be the worst legislation in U.S. history, and will cost the nation vast sums it can't afford

How the Medicare drug benefit will inevitably lead to higher taxes and price controls that will reduce the supply of new life-saving drugs

Why the chief "beneficiaries" of the drug benefit will not be hard-pressed seniors, but big corporations

Why the Bush tax cuts have accomplished relatively little economically. Why many of its provisions are the tax-equivalent of pork-barrel spending -- costing revenue while doing little or nothing to increase economic growth or improve the structure of the tax system

Why Bush may ultimately be responsible for the largest tax increase in history, as the inevitable result of his policies -- though it may not come on his watch

Why the inevitable tax increase will probably a European-style value-added tax (VAT)

How the Administration's policies are developed with little analysis or forethought, then rammed through a compliant Congress -- leading to both economic and political mistakes that could have been avoided

Why the Bush White House has the worst record on free trade since Herbert Hoover

Why Clinton was actually better on the budget than Bush -- vetoing bills because they cost too much (Bush hasn't vetoed a single one) and significantly reducing overall government spending (Bush has massively increased it)

The Regulatory President: how, after promising to roll back Clinton's regulatory excesses, Bush has sacrificed principle to politics and allowed regulation to flourish

Why Bush's policies have far more in common with Nixon's than Reagan's -- especially in his failed attempts to woo moderates by enacting liberal programs (like Medicare expansion) that harmed the economy and GOP fortunes

http://www.conservativebookservice.com/produc...

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2700 Nov 20, 2012
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>have you noticed that most of CRA changes took place under GHW Bush and G W Bush adminstrations and First Legislative change took place under GHW Bush's Adminstration.
Talking to yourself?
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#2701 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Probably because we're not China or Cuba, you doddering old Depends wearing fool.
lol! No son. It's just that you're not smart enough to know and too lazy to find out.

So you have nothing left to offer but the personal attacks.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2703 Nov 20, 2012
Hates Ignorance wrote:
"Indeed, Clinton has admitted that he was given wrong advice about the need to regulate derivatives contracts.“I think they were wrong, and I think I was wrong to take” their advice, Clinton said of his economic advisers."
"You don't know wtf ur talking about.'
At least Democrats can recognize, admit to & learn from mistakes. While the other side denies and stubbornly insists on repeating or doubling down on them.
Clinton: I Was Wrong to Listen to Wrong Advice Against Regulating Derivatives

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2010/04/...
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#2704 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
If Bush vetoed all these spending bills, then why are idiotic libs on here accusing him of bankrupting us?
Bush had the deficit down to under $200 billion right before the democrat authored mortgage meltdown occurred.
When are you going to admit Bush did a great job of dealing with the economic chaos caused by 9/11 ? Libs act like it never happened.
I will fault Bush for his misplaced "compassionate conservatism", he should have vetoed many more foolish spending bills proposed by both parties.
Of course then libs would have accused him of racism and hating the blacks, the illegals, the mexicans, the poor. You know they would of.
lol! What a dope son. Even with the facts you prefer your opinion instead.

I bet you don't even know not all banks were required to fall under CRA. Or better still, you don't know which banks are!

Conservative "facts" requires no brains. Just a willingness to swallow what central command tells them.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2705 Nov 20, 2012
Hates Ignorance wrote:
"Indeed, Clinton has admitted that he was given wrong advice about the need to regulate derivatives contracts.“I think they were wrong, and I think I was wrong to take” their advice, Clinton said of his economic advisers."
"You don't know wtf ur talking about.'
At least Democrats can recognize, admit to & learn from mistakes. While the other side denies and stubbornly insists on repeating or doubling down on them.
Hogwash, but thanks for admitting that Clinton admitted he screwed up. And contributed mightily to the coming mortgage meltdown.

sage won

“life under BO”

Since: Sep 12

buena vista

#2706 Nov 20, 2012
Vicky Phelps wrote:
<quoted text>The Republicans haven't learned a thing from this election and that's why they won't win another national election again until they know who their opponent is. 47% of Americans are not looking for handouts.
Too many are. An estimated $500 billion a year on all levels given away.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2707 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Talking to yourself?
Nope, just referencing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2708 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Too many are. An estimated $500 billion a year on all levels given away.
Government Spends More on Corporate Welfare Subsidies than Social Welfare Programs

About $59 billion is spent on traditional social welfare programs.$92 billion is spent on corporate subsidies. So, the government spent 50% more on corporate welfare than it did on food stamps and housing assistance in 2006.

http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending...
Yeah

Mililani, HI

#2709 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
Hogwash, but thanks for admitting that Clinton admitted he screwed up. And contributed mightily to the coming mortgage meltdown.
lol! Poor baby. He still can't stand to look at the facts.

Of course that would make him look silly and stupid but at least it would show he had SOME integrity!

Guess we can chuck that out the window too!

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#2710 Nov 20, 2012
sage won wrote:
<quoted text>
If Bush vetoed all these spending bills, then why are idiotic libs on here accusing him of bankrupting us?
Bush had the deficit down to under $200 billion right before the democrat authored mortgage meltdown occurred.
When are you going to admit Bush did a great job of dealing with the economic chaos caused by 9/11 ? Libs act like it never happened.
I will fault Bush for his misplaced "compassionate conservatism", he should have vetoed many more foolish spending bills proposed by both parties.
Of course then libs would have accused him of racism and hating the blacks, the illegals, the mexicans, the poor. You know they would of.
Bruce Bartlett, a highly respected Republican economist and an alumnus of the Reagan White House Wrote a book accusing Bush of Bankrupting the United States.

Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy

http://www.conservativebookservice.com/produc...

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.

US Senate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News GOP at war with itself 2 min Quirky 1,683
News In this Aug. 15, 2016 file photo, Democratic pr... 11 min Carol 6
News Clinton keeps stay-the-course strategy on found... 12 min OccupyThis 1
News The Latest: Trump gets support from leader of '... 19 min OccupyThis 1
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 33 min storm warning 1,417,666
News Harry Reid calls mother of Benghazi victim 'cra... 39 min storm warning 15
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 48 min Frankie Rizzo 15,733
More from around the web