You weasels still think Kerry has a chance?!
- Thread starter Wilson
- Start date
"In any capitalistic country, there will be a 'lower rung', as you put it. I don't think it helps anybody to have an attitude of looking down your nose at them, or to mock efforts to get them to the polls. While they may not be as fortunate as yourself, they count too, believe it or not."
I don't believe it is looking down my nose but rather concerned on who determines and what their motives for making decisions that effect the the economy and plight of the U.S.
It used to be the 80/20 rule 80% of productive american took care of the other 20% . Those numbers have changed drastically.
Would you take someone who never bothered to finish high school, who couldn't produce a stable work resume ect and put them in charge of "your" company.Yet you would want them to ultimately make the decision who runs this country.
This election could very easily be decided on voter turnout in Cleveland Ohio. There are those who will find away to make it regardless of who is pres such as yourself--but there are many more in the last decade who want the gov to decide their lifestyle and not take responsibilty for their own actions.
I have just one question for you and maybe you can change my outlook.
Why does one segmant(and you know what it is) vote 90% liberal---why is it this same segmant lead statistically per capita in crime-lack of education-pay-out of marriage wedlock-welfare benefits-incarcerated and I could go on.
Its because contrary to what DR king told them about taking responsibilty and education and doing better than the next guy--you now have era of Jessie Jackson telling them its not their fault,society owes it to them--and the Kerry's continuely tell they will see the gov takes care of them.
Take a look at the affluent blacks that have had to work harder than most to get ahead but did so-most will tell you same thing.
When you cross this 80/20 barrier there is some point in time that something has to give. You can do two things, try to make those take responsibilty with help in helping themselves or reward them by taking from the productive to accomodate them.
One thing I will give slick credit for he was on right track in this issue.
While all the promises Kerry makes sounds good it is impossible to accomplish without putting more buren on the tax payers with more benefits to the non tax payer.
As a business owner I am sure you realize that if you have 10 employees and $200,000 profit annualy for your company to surive--if they raise minimum wage to $7 an hour you only have 2 choices to reach your bottom line--raise price on your goods (snowball effect) or lay off employee.
--and while Kerrys Healthcare sounds great it is same reason as always it has never been feasible. His soltion is to expand medicare and medicaid but admits system is in trouble now as it stands.
Make sense????
I don't believe it is looking down my nose but rather concerned on who determines and what their motives for making decisions that effect the the economy and plight of the U.S.
It used to be the 80/20 rule 80% of productive american took care of the other 20% . Those numbers have changed drastically.
Would you take someone who never bothered to finish high school, who couldn't produce a stable work resume ect and put them in charge of "your" company.Yet you would want them to ultimately make the decision who runs this country.
This election could very easily be decided on voter turnout in Cleveland Ohio. There are those who will find away to make it regardless of who is pres such as yourself--but there are many more in the last decade who want the gov to decide their lifestyle and not take responsibilty for their own actions.
I have just one question for you and maybe you can change my outlook.
Why does one segmant(and you know what it is) vote 90% liberal---why is it this same segmant lead statistically per capita in crime-lack of education-pay-out of marriage wedlock-welfare benefits-incarcerated and I could go on.
Its because contrary to what DR king told them about taking responsibilty and education and doing better than the next guy--you now have era of Jessie Jackson telling them its not their fault,society owes it to them--and the Kerry's continuely tell they will see the gov takes care of them.
Take a look at the affluent blacks that have had to work harder than most to get ahead but did so-most will tell you same thing.
When you cross this 80/20 barrier there is some point in time that something has to give. You can do two things, try to make those take responsibilty with help in helping themselves or reward them by taking from the productive to accomodate them.
One thing I will give slick credit for he was on right track in this issue.
While all the promises Kerry makes sounds good it is impossible to accomplish without putting more buren on the tax payers with more benefits to the non tax payer.
As a business owner I am sure you realize that if you have 10 employees and $200,000 profit annualy for your company to surive--if they raise minimum wage to $7 an hour you only have 2 choices to reach your bottom line--raise price on your goods (snowball effect) or lay off employee.
--and while Kerrys Healthcare sounds great it is same reason as always it has never been feasible. His soltion is to expand medicare and medicaid but admits system is in trouble now as it stands.
Make sense????
Wayne:
I appreciate your continuing to capitalize on a popular theme, that is, that if Kerry is elected he will revive, reinstitute and/or create all sorts of nice give away programs in order that shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks (and we all know who you mean) can continue to be shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks.
The only problem with your theory is that it is completely and totally wrong. I believe, although I'm not sure, that you give credit to President Clinton or, as you call him, "slick" for restructuring the welfare system. You are right on that point.
Clinton changed welfare into workfare. I know you think that if Kerry is elected he will just give the money away. That is the popular concept. I mean really there is no basis for your position that this is a giveaway program Kerry is in favor of.
Raising the minimum wage will help people get out of poverty. Wayne, do the math. Working a 40 hour week, 50 weeks out of the year at minimum wage of $5.15 per hour equals an annual salary of $10,300.00.
If Kerry raises the minimum wage to say $7.00 per hour, that same person will make $14,000.00. Not exactly the lap of luxury but much more realistic in todays world. Maybe they will be able to buy food.
Now looking at the other end of the spectrum, I think guys like me and I presume you can afford to 1) NOT HAVE OUR TAXES INCREASED, but rather have the roll back of cuts. Believe me, with the roll back, I will still be able to afford my Friday night sushi.
Making $14,000 per year as opposed to $10,300 may get some of the shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks off the couch and into the job application lines. You know given the choice between working and not eating versus not working and eating, my 195 pound girth is staying home and eating chips.
Your approach is, once again, a scare tactic so often used by your side of the aisle that it really would be funny except for the fact that our intellgence challenged friends may believe it. Kerry is not going to put you in the poor house.
Rather, he may get some people out of it which will benefit all of us.
Eddie
I appreciate your continuing to capitalize on a popular theme, that is, that if Kerry is elected he will revive, reinstitute and/or create all sorts of nice give away programs in order that shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks (and we all know who you mean) can continue to be shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks.
The only problem with your theory is that it is completely and totally wrong. I believe, although I'm not sure, that you give credit to President Clinton or, as you call him, "slick" for restructuring the welfare system. You are right on that point.
Clinton changed welfare into workfare. I know you think that if Kerry is elected he will just give the money away. That is the popular concept. I mean really there is no basis for your position that this is a giveaway program Kerry is in favor of.
Raising the minimum wage will help people get out of poverty. Wayne, do the math. Working a 40 hour week, 50 weeks out of the year at minimum wage of $5.15 per hour equals an annual salary of $10,300.00.
If Kerry raises the minimum wage to say $7.00 per hour, that same person will make $14,000.00. Not exactly the lap of luxury but much more realistic in todays world. Maybe they will be able to buy food.
Now looking at the other end of the spectrum, I think guys like me and I presume you can afford to 1) NOT HAVE OUR TAXES INCREASED, but rather have the roll back of cuts. Believe me, with the roll back, I will still be able to afford my Friday night sushi.
Making $14,000 per year as opposed to $10,300 may get some of the shuffling, lazy, welfare-receiving folks off the couch and into the job application lines. You know given the choice between working and not eating versus not working and eating, my 195 pound girth is staying home and eating chips.
Your approach is, once again, a scare tactic so often used by your side of the aisle that it really would be funny except for the fact that our intellgence challenged friends may believe it. Kerry is not going to put you in the poor house.
Rather, he may get some people out of it which will benefit all of us.
Eddie
Back to the original question. Does Kerry Have A Chance.
YES after these debates. I cant believe Bush has lost a 8/9 point lead during these debates. Thats a big swing this late. And last time it happen all (3 times) since records like this have been kept. The incumbent lost all.
YES after these debates. I cant believe Bush has lost a 8/9 point lead during these debates. Thats a big swing this late. And last time it happen all (3 times) since records like this have been kept. The incumbent lost all.
Wayne,
Eddie pretty much summed up my thoughts on the minimum wage.
You mentioned (surely with a scowl that would make Bush blush) how (black, by your implication) voter turnout in Cleveland could influence the election. Well, of course. Ohio has been hit very hard by job loss during Bush's term. Doesn't it stand to reason that those people affected might just want to vote for a change?
You make it sound like the welfare abusers and drug addicts are deciding the presidency. You also cite how 90% of blacks vote democrat with the implication that this is because they all want to sit around and have the government finance their lifes expenses. This is lazy thinking and borderline racist.
Perhaps the reason that they vote overwhelmingly democrat is because that is the only party that has shown the least bit of interest in them?
What about Jewish people? They strongly favor the democratic party(Bush got 19% of the Jewish vote in 2000). Is this also because they are looking for a handout?
Or how about those lazy Asians? Polls show them with about a 10 point preference for Kerry.
Hey, maybe the blue hairs down here that feel they are getting screwed by Bush's health care plan will have a big influence on the outcome of the election. Those lazy retirees who don't even work anymore, who are basically unproductive members of our society and only want their social security handout from the government actually influencing an election? Say it ain't so!
Eddie pretty much summed up my thoughts on the minimum wage.
You mentioned (surely with a scowl that would make Bush blush) how (black, by your implication) voter turnout in Cleveland could influence the election. Well, of course. Ohio has been hit very hard by job loss during Bush's term. Doesn't it stand to reason that those people affected might just want to vote for a change?
You make it sound like the welfare abusers and drug addicts are deciding the presidency. You also cite how 90% of blacks vote democrat with the implication that this is because they all want to sit around and have the government finance their lifes expenses. This is lazy thinking and borderline racist.
Perhaps the reason that they vote overwhelmingly democrat is because that is the only party that has shown the least bit of interest in them?
What about Jewish people? They strongly favor the democratic party(Bush got 19% of the Jewish vote in 2000). Is this also because they are looking for a handout?
Or how about those lazy Asians? Polls show them with about a 10 point preference for Kerry.
Hey, maybe the blue hairs down here that feel they are getting screwed by Bush's health care plan will have a big influence on the outcome of the election. Those lazy retirees who don't even work anymore, who are basically unproductive members of our society and only want their social security handout from the government actually influencing an election? Say it ain't so!
Good points on the Asians and Jewish people, Matt. and on the border line racist I would hope that I am not. While it might appear that way I think it stems from being in lineof business of risk management for so long. I look at statistics instead of polititically correct views.
Examples;
Obese people should pay higher health premiums as well as smokers as they are greater health risks same as someone age 55 vs someone 25.
If you park your car in good neighborhood it is less likely to get stolen than in Watts.
It is greater risk to insure property where they burn their own neighborhood than other areas.
Gays are MUCH greater risk than hetrosexuals ect.
so I think I look at facts vs ideas
As in my discussion with Edward last year about this time.
Would you drop your kids off in getto to trick or treating this year.
Of course not--does that make you a racist????
Funny how PC ideas have a way of going away when there are REAL consequences involved--
Examples;
Obese people should pay higher health premiums as well as smokers as they are greater health risks same as someone age 55 vs someone 25.
If you park your car in good neighborhood it is less likely to get stolen than in Watts.
It is greater risk to insure property where they burn their own neighborhood than other areas.
Gays are MUCH greater risk than hetrosexuals ect.
so I think I look at facts vs ideas
As in my discussion with Edward last year about this time.
Would you drop your kids off in getto to trick or treating this year.
Of course not--does that make you a racist????
Funny how PC ideas have a way of going away when there are REAL consequences involved--
Did some checking on jewish voting history as I intially thought with Lieberman on ticket probably accounted for disparity--but not the case--92 and 96 were also around 80% with projected 2004 about the same. I find that quite interesting and will do some research to findout why.
The asian vote was quite easy to figure--National figures were not that bad considering most are located in CA and New York which areas they live vote Dem in general accross all cultures
National Asian vote
Exit polls say that Asians voted 55% Gore, 41% Bush, 3% Nader
California
A LA times exit poll say that Asians voted 63% Gore, 33% Bush, 1% Nader
Bay Area
For a Chinese Voter Education Committee exit poll conducted in San Francisco, Gore received 82% of the Chinese American votes to Bush's 16%. The Chinese vote for Gore surpassed the citywide 75% margin for Gore. Wilma Chan easily won her assembly seat in Oakland and Alameda. The 3 incumbent Asian Americans in SF are all in runoffs for their new district seats in December. Eric Mar was elected to the SF Board of Education. Mabel Teng is facing a runoff election for County Supervisor in San Francsico, polling less than 50%. The run off election will be held in Decmeber.
LA
Asian Pacific American Legal Center conducted a?survey of 5,000 voters--2,000 of them Asian Americans--conducted in heavily Asian neighborhoods, showed Vice President Al Gore received 62.3% of the votes cast by Asian Americans, while Gov. George W. Bush garnered 34.7%. ???
Van Thai Trann to the Garden Grove City Council. He is believed to be the nation's second Vietnamese American to win an elective office..
New York City
from AALDEF
Over 5,000 Asian American voters surveyed in a multilingual Election Day exit poll chose Al Gore for President by a margin of 3 to 1, while 4 out of 5 favored Hillary Rodham Clinton over Rick Lazio in New York?s U.S. Senate race.
According to preliminary exit poll results from 14 sites in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens with large Asian American populations:
* 78% of Asian Americans polled voted for Democrat Al Gore for President, with 20% voting for Republican George W. Bush. Overall, Gore won 77% of all New York City voters and Bus
* In the U.S. Senate race, 82% of Asian Americans polled voted for Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, with only 17% supporting Republican Rick Lazio. Citywide, Clinton received 73% of the vote, with 26% going to Lazio.
* 60% of Asian Americans polled registered as Democrats, increasing 6% since the 1996 election. In contrast, the Republican enrollment dropped to 14% losing 6% since 1996, while those who chose no party affiliation remained about the same at 24%.
* 37% of Asian Americans polled were first-time voters.
Chinese American voters were the largest ethnic group that participated in the poll (69%), followed by South Asians, Korean Americans, and Filipino Americanss.
The exit poll was conducted in 5 languages and dialects by over 250 multilingual volunteers from AALDEF, Chinatown Voter Education Alliance, Filipino Civil Rights Advocates, Korean American Voters? Council, South Asian Youth Action, and the Young Korean American Service and Education Center
and Edward -- for the record per my education
while I did attend Southeast Mo State and U of Mo -- I did not graduate sad to say,took minimum hours 12 for GI bill partied more than studied--young and dumb and full of cum and I do NOT average over $200,000 a year--but do manage to save bout 25% of what I do make by living a very modest lifestyle.
The asian vote was quite easy to figure--National figures were not that bad considering most are located in CA and New York which areas they live vote Dem in general accross all cultures
National Asian vote
Exit polls say that Asians voted 55% Gore, 41% Bush, 3% Nader
California
A LA times exit poll say that Asians voted 63% Gore, 33% Bush, 1% Nader
Bay Area
For a Chinese Voter Education Committee exit poll conducted in San Francisco, Gore received 82% of the Chinese American votes to Bush's 16%. The Chinese vote for Gore surpassed the citywide 75% margin for Gore. Wilma Chan easily won her assembly seat in Oakland and Alameda. The 3 incumbent Asian Americans in SF are all in runoffs for their new district seats in December. Eric Mar was elected to the SF Board of Education. Mabel Teng is facing a runoff election for County Supervisor in San Francsico, polling less than 50%. The run off election will be held in Decmeber.
LA
Asian Pacific American Legal Center conducted a?survey of 5,000 voters--2,000 of them Asian Americans--conducted in heavily Asian neighborhoods, showed Vice President Al Gore received 62.3% of the votes cast by Asian Americans, while Gov. George W. Bush garnered 34.7%. ???
Van Thai Trann to the Garden Grove City Council. He is believed to be the nation's second Vietnamese American to win an elective office..
New York City
from AALDEF
Over 5,000 Asian American voters surveyed in a multilingual Election Day exit poll chose Al Gore for President by a margin of 3 to 1, while 4 out of 5 favored Hillary Rodham Clinton over Rick Lazio in New York?s U.S. Senate race.
According to preliminary exit poll results from 14 sites in Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens with large Asian American populations:
* 78% of Asian Americans polled voted for Democrat Al Gore for President, with 20% voting for Republican George W. Bush. Overall, Gore won 77% of all New York City voters and Bus
* In the U.S. Senate race, 82% of Asian Americans polled voted for Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton, with only 17% supporting Republican Rick Lazio. Citywide, Clinton received 73% of the vote, with 26% going to Lazio.
* 60% of Asian Americans polled registered as Democrats, increasing 6% since the 1996 election. In contrast, the Republican enrollment dropped to 14% losing 6% since 1996, while those who chose no party affiliation remained about the same at 24%.
* 37% of Asian Americans polled were first-time voters.
Chinese American voters were the largest ethnic group that participated in the poll (69%), followed by South Asians, Korean Americans, and Filipino Americanss.
The exit poll was conducted in 5 languages and dialects by over 250 multilingual volunteers from AALDEF, Chinatown Voter Education Alliance, Filipino Civil Rights Advocates, Korean American Voters? Council, South Asian Youth Action, and the Young Korean American Service and Education Center
and Edward -- for the record per my education
while I did attend Southeast Mo State and U of Mo -- I did not graduate sad to say,took minimum hours 12 for GI bill partied more than studied--young and dumb and full of cum and I do NOT average over $200,000 a year--but do manage to save bout 25% of what I do make by living a very modest lifestyle.
Last edited:
DOGS THAT BARK said:
Sending your kids to a ghetto on halloween has absolutely nothing to do with what we are talking about, in any way. Of course that's not racist.
As far as 'PC' goes, I don't think that there's anything PC about giving a shit about people in the lower tax brackets. Or not assuming that every person who struggles to make ends meet somehow deserves it, as you and Freeze strongly imply quite often.
Thanks for looking up the Asian and Jewish voting tendencies. I guess I underestimated the Asian preference for the democratic party by a little.
Like you, I also find the Jewish vote a little puzzling, especially given the fairly disparate ways that Republicans and Democrats look at the Israel/Palestine issue.
