Author Topic: Who could defeat Obama? (Read 979 times)

nw_hunter · « **on:** December 22, 2011, 05:05:46 AM »

Another outright lie against Paul by the media is..........(He's not electable) He could never beat Obama

I think the media believes he could, and that is why they don't like to show him in a fair and balanced way.
http://www.therightperspective.org/2011/12/06/ron-paul-polls-strongest-against-obama/

BBF · « **Reply #1 on:** December 23, 2011, 11:03:55 AM »

You would think after the dismal performance of the present WH Admin. just about anyone could defeat the Prez.

I had a rude shock when I saw a bunch of college guys discuss the cost of tuition for their education and expectation to find a good job once they graduated.

The Moderator asked the group if they would still vote for Obama( they all had) if the economy would be similar or even get worse. Out of of the whole group, just one raised his hand saying he would not. This is what gets turned out in your Colleges and Universities.

I would not count on Prez Obama leaving the WH very soon.

verzilli · « **Reply #2 on:** December 23, 2011, 11:20:13 AM »

Who could defeat Obama? No one.

Stillkickin · « **Reply #3 on:** December 23, 2011, 11:57:01 AM »

There probably are many people who could defeat obama if that's all there was to it. Unfortunately, and to be more accurate, NOBODY can defeat obama + the media + the financial backing of Hollywood + the financial backing of George Soros + the financial backing of China + the fraudulent manipulation of the voting process.

Swampman · « **Reply #4 on:** December 23, 2011, 12:04:50 PM »

Newt is the only one right now. The rest are a cast of clowns.

SteveHawaii · « **Reply #5 on:** December 23, 2011, 12:34:08 PM »

IMHO, no one will be able to defeat Obama as long as the economy continues to improve.

Swampman · « **Reply #6 on:** December 23, 2011, 01:11:59 PM »

Where's it improving?

verzilli · « **Reply #7 on:** December 23, 2011, 01:30:20 PM »

To StillKickin: absolutely correct.

As for Newt, he is brilliant, would wipe the floor with Obama, has what it takes; would LOVE to see him in...but (a) has a dumb name (sorry); (b) has too much personal baggage; (c) has too much political "insider" baggage.

Just my opinion.

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #8 on:** December 23, 2011, 01:58:53 PM »

To think that Newt could beat Obama is a joke. With the amount of baggage he has the liberal media will rip him to shreds.

nomosendero · « **Reply #9 on:** December 23, 2011, 02:51:46 PM »

Anyone who is nominated will be ripped to shreads by the media, either with truth or lies, doesn't matter to the media, they will use any means they can.

magooch · « **Reply #10 on:** December 23, 2011, 05:08:40 PM »

Obama can fool all of the people some of the time; he can also fool some of the people all of the time, but he can't fool all of the people all of the time. Unfortunately, the son of a ... well he only needs to fool about half the people and at least that many are fools to start with.

Swampman · « **Reply #11 on:** December 24, 2011, 01:09:08 AM »

Those who support socialism will vote for Obama and his ilk. Their numbers increase daily as people get older and the irresponsible continue to have unwanted child afer child. Those of us who are (and who have been) responsible don't have a chance.

Junior1942 · « **Reply #12 on:** December 24, 2011, 02:44:50 AM »

Quote from: Swampman on December 23, 2011, 01:11:59 PM

Where's it improving?

The DJIA closed at 6626 soon after GW Bush left office. It closed yesterday at 12,294.

magooch · « **Reply #13 on:** December 24, 2011, 03:17:38 AM »

So--the stock market hit its absolute peak during Bush's time, but that was before the Dumycrats took over Congress in 2007 and started the decline.

Spending the country into oblivion, constantly touting class envy, advocating increased taxation of the successful, doing everything possible to raise energy costs and excessive regulation is hardly the formula for improving the economy. That has been the record and modus operandi of the Obama administration. The state of the stock market is very tenuous at best and in any case is not a direct measure of the economy in general.

Junior1942 · « **Reply #14 on:** December 24, 2011, 04:18:49 AM »

Quote from: magooch on December 24, 2011, 03:17:38 AM

So--the stock market hit its absolute peak during Bush's time, but that was before the Dumycrats took over Congress in 2007 and started the decline.

Spending the country into oblivion, constantly touting class envy, advocating increased taxation of the successful, doing everything possible to raise energy costs and excessive regulation is hardly the formula for improving the economy. That has been the record and modus operandi of the Obama administration. The state of the stock market is very tenuous at best and in any case is not a direct measure of the economy in general.

Congratulations, magooch, that post is an outstanding example of spin and obfuscation.

lakota · « **Reply #15 on:** December 24, 2011, 04:22:25 AM »

Quote from: magooch on December 24, 2011, 03:17:38 AM

So--the stock market hit its absolute peak during Bush's time, but that was before the Dumycrats took over Congress in 2007 and started the decline.

Spending the country into oblivion, constantly touting class envy, advocating increased taxation of the successful, doing everything possible to raise energy costs and excessive regulation is hardly the formula for improving the economy. That has been the record and modus operandi of the Obama administration. The state of the stock market is very tenuous at best and in any case is not a direct measure of the economy in general.

Looks like the truth to me.

quasne.inc · « **Reply #16 on:** December 24, 2011, 05:43:58 AM »

I read somewhere that said, "Obama isnt the problem, a nation that would vote for Obama is." Never have truer words been said.

bilmac · « **Reply #17 on:** December 24, 2011, 06:12:28 AM »

Any one of the Republican candidates will get my enthusiastic support, I will even be happy to vote for Paul if he is the nominee. Way better his off the wall ideas about foreign policy than Obama's. At least Paul is honest about what he believes. Obama tries to make the lemmings believe that he is just another president, when his actions are promoting our enemies and snubbing our friends.

If the world was fair any one of them could beat him hands down. A lying press and election fraud are just a couple of reasons to worry.

BBF · « **Reply #18 on:** December 24, 2011, 07:53:30 AM »

If something in the 40+% still thinks the Prez is doing a good job, the country is in deeper trouble then many realize.

gypsyman · « **Reply #19 on:** December 24, 2011, 08:30:42 AM »

quasne.inc., there was a few of us when Obama got elected, said that. A president can be changed every 4 years.(hopefully) It's the people that voted him in in the first place, are the ones we have to worry about. gypsyman

Doublebass73 · « **Reply #20 on:** December 24, 2011, 11:39:26 AM »

Quote from: BBF on December 24, 2011, 07:53:30 AM

If something in the 40+% still thinks the Prez is doing a good job, the country is in deeper trouble then many realize.

Very good point.

Dixiejack · « **Reply #21 on:** December 24, 2011, 12:07:51 PM »

Quote from: verzilli on December 23, 2011, 01:30:20 PM

To StillKickin: absolutely correct.

As for Newt, he is brilliant, would wipe the floor with Obama, has what it takes; would LOVE to see him in...but (a) has a dumb name (sorry); (b) has too much personal baggage; (c) has too much political "insider" baggage.

Just my opinion.

And you think Barack Obama is not a dumb name??

Dixiejack · « **Reply #22 on:** December 24, 2011, 12:21:43 PM »

"I had a rude shock when I saw a bunch of college guys discuss the cost of tuition for their education and expectation to find a good job once they graduated.

The Moderator asked the group if they would still vote for Obama( they all had) if the economy would be similar or even get worse. Out of of the whole group, just one raised his hand saying he would not. This is what gets turned out in your Colleges and Universities."

What University or College are you talking about? And your opinion is based on the opinions of one group of college students?

magooch · « **Reply #23 on:** December 25, 2011, 04:20:03 AM »

Quote from: Junior1942 on December 24, 2011, 04:18:49 AM

Quote from: magooch on December 24, 2011, 03:17:38 AM
So--the stock market hit its absolute peak during Bush's time, but that was before the Dumycrats took over Congress in 2007 and started the decline.

Spending the country into oblivion, constantly touting class envy, advocating increased taxation of the successful, doing everything possible to raise energy costs and excessive regulation is hardly the formula for improving the economy. That has been the record and modus operandi of the Obama administration. The state of the stock market is very tenuous at best and in any case is not a direct measure of the economy in general.
Congratulations, magooch, that post is an outstanding example of spin and obfuscation.

And your post is an outstanding example of the inability to counter my clear and concise facts.

BBF · « **Reply #24 on:** December 25, 2011, 05:07:20 AM »

In response to reply #22

What is the ratio of Democrats vs Republican votes that come out of your institutions of higher learnings, both staff and students. Those numbers should give the answer.

Dixiejack · « **Reply #25 on:** December 25, 2011, 05:55:18 AM »

BBF,
You skirted my questions with a question. I will be happy to answer yours. I have no idea what the ratio is. Perhaps you can tell me. The college I teach at has a "Young Republican Party" and does not have any active student Democrat organization. We are located in the Deep South which has always been traditionally Democrat.

Again, I ask from Post #22 "What University or College are you talking about? And your opinion is based on the opinions of one group of college students?"

Junior1942 · « **Reply #26 on:** December 25, 2011, 06:30:14 AM »

Quote from: magooch on December 25, 2011, 04:20:03 AM

Quote from: Junior1942 on December 24, 2011, 04:18:49 AM
Quote from: magooch on December 24, 2011, 03:17:38 AM
So--the stock market hit its absolute peak during Bush's time, but that was before the Dumycrats took over Congress in 2007 and started the decline.

Spending the country into oblivion, constantly touting class envy, advocating increased taxation of the successful, doing everything possible to raise energy costs and excessive regulation is hardly the formula for improving the economy. That has been the record and modus operandi of the Obama administration. The state of the stock market is very tenuous at best and in any case is not a direct measure of the economy in general.
Congratulations, magooch, that post is an outstanding example of spin and obfuscation.

And your post is an outstanding example of the inability to counter my clear and concise facts.

Don't you mean clear and concise spin?