The LAST Presidential Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
I agree..my husband and I are middle class and we are suffering financially..have to keep borrowing from my daughter's college savings to pay for bills.

It is time for us to get a break.

My sister is doing the same thing for her daughter. In fact, last night she and I had a conversation about how difficult it is to be middle class. She told me how lucky I was (however, not in an insulting way) to be receiving disability payments until I finish my Bachelor's degree. She also told me how she lost $20,000 in her 401(k) because of the current poor state of the economy. Now she needs to find a way to recover that money. The only way she can do it is by dipping into her daughter's college fund. :(

Yup, middle class are very important to boost the economy.

My parent have quietly difficult life since they are middle class and my mother had took some money out of 401k, also they are quietly more easily on life during 80's and 90's.
 
Yup, middle class are very important to boost the economy.

My parent have quietly difficult life since they are middle class and my mother had took some money out of 401k, also they are quietly more easily on life during 80's and 90's.

Yes -- and that's yet another reason to vote for Obama. In every single debate, McCain has never mentioned the middle class -- not even once. McCain claims to understand what it's like to "struggle" yet this is the same person who owns 7 homes. :roll:
 
hhmmm... I don't have anything against you and I do recognize the fact that America is a very diversed country ranging from ultra-conservative to ultra-liberal. Your POV is quite interesting and I completely understand it. :cool2:

you almost cornered your self but since you put that getting your child medicine part you got out of it.

I believe the economy is doing it's natural flush and it's currently cleaning out the worthless people who's been raising stock prices.

So if Obama gets in and the economy don't improves what will you do if they did banned guns while no one was looking? Everyone is focusing on the economy and that leaves the door open for bills to be passed without the media covering it. Next thing you know we are a country with a crappy economy and no way of fending for ourself. I rather own my guns and be able to survive then letting them have my guns and I have no way of supporting myself.
and what does Obama's economic policy has to do with guns? Why do you speak of a complete anarchy and broken government? That is a :crazy: talk like anti-federal government survivalist who builds an underground concrete shelter in his backyard. Again - I have to point out that not a single President in our history has banned the firearms and nobody is going to do so including Obama or any Democrats.

Please kindly provide me any source that says Obama will BAN 2nd Amendment.

Why? If the governments wants to put the loop holes in the tax system why not work it to your advantage?

I'm just saying Taxing someone more just cause they make more money then you is not right.
Actually - Bush Administration (the Republicans) purposely created MORE loopholes thru extensive deregulation and appointing cronies/incompetent people to higher seats.

Please do not confuse yourself. We are not taxing someone MORE just because they make more money. We are taxing them because it's been LONG OVERDUE. They have LONG enjoyed paying little tax for decades. The advantage from loophole goes to super-riches and corporations, not you or people with over $250,000.

If the rich people ACTUALLY pay their due - America would be in better shape in long-term... so good that the tax will be reduced as there will be budget surplus and a more efficient system. At least - we won't have to continue wasting money on broken systems. At least we won't have to shit away our money on high gas price, high food price, high cost of anything.

Perhaps you are a business-oriented person since you will be raking in 6-digits next year. Surely you should know about the benefits from long-term strategic plans. This should be good for you and all of us. This means our public infrastructure will be greatly improved.
 
I watched the debate last night and the more I watch, the more I am wondering about how McCain was able to keep it up and to keep himself together through out the debate.

Bob Schiffer did a good job moderating the debate.

When Schiffer asked both candidates what cuts are they going to make in order to reduce the deficit. From what I see, McCain kept beating around the bush and did not answer the question directly. Schiffer had to ask him the same question twice and in the end, McCain finally answered the question. It also makes me wonder if one cannot answer the question directly, How would one be able to do a negotiation or to solve a problem without beating around the bush?

Also, Come to think of it, When they were talking about how both campaign team were portraying negative ads on the TV, McCain was taking it on a personal level by lashing out at Obama.

This is from last night's debate transcript;

McCain: Well, this has been a tough campaign. It's been a very tough campaign. And I know from my experience in many campaigns that, if Sen. Obama had asked -- responded to my urgent request to sit down, and do town hall meetings, and come before the American people, we could have done at least 10 of them by now.

When Sen. Obama was first asked, he said, "Any place, any time," the way Barry Goldwater and Jack Kennedy agreed to do, before the intervention of the tragedy at Dallas. So I think the tone of this campaign could have been very different.

And the fact is, it's gotten pretty tough. And I regret some of the negative aspects of both campaigns. But the fact is that it has taken many turns which I think are unacceptable.

One of them happened just the other day, when a man I admire and respect -- I've written about him -- Congressman John Lewis, an American hero, made allegations that Sarah Palin and I were somehow associated with the worst chapter in American history, segregation, deaths of children in church bombings, George Wallace. That, to me, was so hurtful.

And, Sen. Obama, you didn't repudiate those remarks. Every time there's been an out-of-bounds remark made by a Republican, no matter where they are, I have repudiated them. I hope that Sen. Obama will repudiate those remarks that were made by Congressman John Lewis, very unfair and totally inappropriate.


So I want to tell you, we will run a truthful campaign. This is a tough campaign. And it's a matter of fact that Sen. Obama has spent more money on negative ads than any political campaign in history. And I can prove it.

And, Sen. Obama, when he said -- and he signed a piece of paper that said he would take public financing for his campaign if I did -- that was back when he was a long-shot candidate -- you didn't keep your word.

And when you looked into the camera in a debate with Sen. Clinton and said, "I will sit down and negotiate with John McCain about public financing before I make a decision," you didn't tell the American people the truth because you didn't.

And that's -- that's -- that's an unfortunate part. Now we have the highest spending by Sen. Obama's campaign than any time since Watergate.

Schieffer: Time's up. All right.

Obama: Well, look, you know, I think that we expect presidential campaigns to be tough. I think that, if you look at the record and the impressions of the American people -- Bob, your network just did a poll, showing that two-thirds of the American people think that Sen. McCain is running a negative campaign versus one-third of mine.

And 100 percent, John, of your ads -- 100 percent of them have been negative.

McCain: It's not true.

Obama: It absolutely is true. And, now, I think the American people are less interested in our hurt feelings during the course of the campaign than addressing the issues that matter to them so deeply.

And there is nothing wrong with us having a vigorous debate like we're having tonight about health care, about energy policy, about tax policy. That's the stuff that campaigns should be made of.


The notion, though, that because we're not doing town hall meetings that justifies some of the ads that have been going up, not just from your own campaign directly, John, but 527s and other organizations that make some pretty tough accusations, well, I don't mind being attacked for the next three weeks.

What the American people can't afford, though, is four more years of failed economic policies. And what they deserve over the next four weeks is that we talk about what's most pressing to them: the economic crisis
There's one thing I do agree, the negative ads was unnecessary. Of course we do expect to see the raw deal of this because it's part of the politics to lash out at each other but as for the feelings, It should have been put aside just like what Obama said.
 
Here's the way I see it: If you are still delusional about Obama and you continue to spread crap, you're beyond helpless.

I would suggest that you spend more time propping up your candidate (McCain) and less time attacking the other guy. Phonebank for McCain. Donate money to him. Hell, offer to mow his lawn for a cabinet position.

The attacks on Obama are useless and unfortunately for you, the rest of the country has made up its' mind.
 
Agreed. When Obama says he'll give tax cuts to 95% of working families, that makes no sense because nearly 40% of them don't have to pay taxes to begin with. What he calls a tax cut is really welfare. I don't want to live in a welfare state. Let people earn their own money.

Do you have facts to back this up?

Also, why do people who make more money get bigger tax cuts to begin with? They don't need them!
 
Do you have facts to back this up?

Also, why do people who make more money get bigger tax cuts to begin with? They don't need them!


I definitely agree with you, when I was first became pregnant I had to work 2 jobs just to make ends meet and didn't make as much but I worked my butt off trying to support my family even through we're still poor.

And the cost of living still goes up!
 
I definitely agree with you, when I was first became pregnant I had to work 2 jobs just to make ends meet and didn't make as much but I worked my butt off trying to support my family even through we're still poor.

And the cost of living still goes up![/QUOTE]

It never ends doesnt it? I am fed up with the cost of living going up!
 
The new motto of the US Government:

Socialism for the rich
Capitalism for the poor


Should be the other way around!
 
yes i'm aware of his stance on gun issue and I didn't like it at all but are you seriously considering this as your biggest concern? Well I don't know about you but the way it's going right now.... eventually you're not going to be able to afford bullets, guns, etc. In fact - you'll probably have to sell your gun and bullets just to put bread on your table or to buy a medicine for your sick child! I'm sure we can put away gun issue just a bit for 4 years. We need more money in our pockets, not bullets. There are more pressing issues than gun rights.

He's not going to ban guns and it's impossible to do that. Look at Clinton Administration. We still had guns (except assault weapon). I like McCain's view on gun rights very much and he's my man for it but unfortunately - it does not solve our economy crisis, health care crisis, education crisis, etc crisis. For me - gun rights goes to bottom of the list.... as long as I get to keep my gun.

:gpost:

I do disagree some of Obama's polities but for me is mainly important that he moviate with economy, education and healthcare than anything.

I am getting disgusted with people for say that pay the tax to help middle class and poor class is a bad idea and complaint that they have to pay 3% tax increase because of their annual earn $250,000 or more.

To my POV, it's okay for the people to pay taxes to support war issues but not okay for 3% tax increase of annual $250,000 or more to support middle class and poor class.. :roll:
 
OK, I am going to share my thoughts... as a woman (Christain at that) ok,,, first of all, do we really know how healthy McCain is? He will be the first oldest president ever and back in 2000 he had skin cancer (removed and seems to be doing fine) How Healthy Is John McCain? - TIME .. he is age and how he appears on TV during the debates (angry) kind of frightens me - hoping he is not stressing himself too much (if our future president)....Then, I feel he picked Pailin for show.... cuz many wanted Clinton..... then also Palin,,, well, to me, she is not a good example for a woman in politics for me - Clinton was, all her childern were over 18 ... Sarah has 5 kids and the baby has down syndrome,, whos taking care of her kids? She's an example to women by showing...... that they can have a bunch of kids and run the United States? Why not have Angelia Jolie run for vice president then? I feel - Palin..should be taking care of these children, especailly a special needs child...then to say she may become President of the US if something happens to McCain? Oh Lord!
Obama, he is calm and cool about what he wants changed in America... I used to be Republican, however after being educated on issues in the United Staes, I know we can not stick to Rebulican strictness and need a lot of open mindness to make changes happen....did u notice how Obama said more than twice "we all need ot work together" in the debate last night? Thats what I want and feel we need to make changes in the US...

:gpost:
 
I viewed their final debate last night but only for 45 minutes on important issues.

I don't like McCain's manner behavior toward Obama is his facial expressions!!! He kept on grinning every time he listen Obama's talk and make "fun" of him than discuss the REAL issue.... McCain is really NOTHING... ZERO!!!! I admired Obama for his good patience and calm...

McCain didn't mention ONCE about his plan for small businesses but Obama does.

My hubby & I laughed at McCain for use "Joe the Plumber" as an example several times on his final debate with Obama... McCain made "Joe the Plumber" media star after a few minutes harmless questions to Obama in Ohio...:giggle: Don't he know that Joe don't have a license to buy his boss's business or he didn't own a business YET? I really feel sorry for Joe that how McCain make him hypothetical!!!

I find "Joe the Plumber" issues really funny... Sorry, I laughed so pain...

McCain talk like childish when he said direct on camera... for Joe.. :laugh2:

I strong beleive that Obama is the right for president of USA. I would vote him when I were Americans.


Yes, that's right Jolie... that's what I like Obama about.

 
A few family members does and I don't plan on making less then $200,000

You're still $50,000 off, so you would actually get more benefits from Obama's plan than from McCain's.

And the Democratics are not necessarily "big in welfare where people who don't work will get money." as you stated. The people that will benefit most from those that go to work every day of their lives and still can't pull themselves up because they are paying a higher percentage of taxes than the fat cats. And, yes, the Democrats have historically instituted more social programs to assist the unfortunate. What would you suggest we do with someone who encounters a catastrophic illness and can't work, and all their insurance benefits run out? Or someone who suffers from a life long mental illness that prevents them working and needs meds just to get through the day, and assistance to purchase the necessities such as food and rent? Without social programs in place to assist these individuals, what would be your solution to people who find themselves in these dire straits? What about a woman with 4 small chidlren whose husband dies unexpectedly leaving her a widow to single handedly raise, feed, clothe, educate, and provide a roof over the children's heads. Should we get rid of all social programs that allow her to raise her children and keep them fed and clothed?
 
Why? If the governments wants to put the loop holes in the tax system why not work it to your advantage?

I'm just saying Taxing someone more just cause they make more money then you is not right.

Then what would you consider to be right? Taxing people who struggle to put food on the table and purchase the medicine they need when they are already have no disposable income?
 
Agreed. When Obama says he'll give tax cuts to 95% of working families, that makes no sense because nearly 40% of them don't have to pay taxes to begin with. What he calls a tax cut is really welfare. I don't want to live in a welfare state. Let people earn their own money.

If they are working, it isn't welfare. People are trying to earn their own money. It is being taken away from them by a tax system that allows those best able to afford to pay taxes to use loopholes and tax breaks to get out of contributing to the financial stability of this country.
 
Yes -- and that's yet another reason to vote for Obama. In every single debate, McCain has never mentioned the middle class -- not even once. McCain claims to understand what it's like to "struggle" yet this is the same person who owns 7 homes. :roll:

And married into a fortune.
 
Income tax is supposed to be VOLUNTARY.
 
Income tax is supposed to be VOLUNTARY.

Then it wouldn't be an income tax, now would it, but a contribution.

And, realistically, it is voluntary. You "volunteer" to pay it when you make the decision to work. The problem is, those that can best afford to "volunteer" the most are being excused for "volunteering" virtually nothing.
 
Do you have facts to back this up?
I think this article gives a pretty fair overview of the issue:
Washington Times - Obama tax cut 'refunds' those who don't pay

Also, why do people who make more money get bigger tax cuts to begin with? They don't need them!
In short, with our progressive tax system, the rich are already paying most of the taxes, so if you're giving an across the board tax-cut, they'll get most of the tax-cuts. They may not need all the money they earn, but that doesn't mean they don't deserve it, as long as they earned it legitimately. I find it interesting that people talk about the rich being greedy with their own money, but you don't hear much about the government being greedy with other people's money.

If you want a more specific answer, here are some stats from the Tax Foundation. They compiled this from the IRS data (which is a lot more detailed). Note that it only gives data through 2006.

The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data

There are a lot of tables on this page and I don't mean to bury you in stats, so just look at tables 5 and 6. Table 5 shows the percent of the country's wealth earned by each income group and table 6 shows the percent of the federal taxes paid by each income group. If you look at 2006, while the top 10% of income earners earn about 37% of the wealth, they're paying 60% of the nation's taxes (and this is after the Bush tax cuts). The bottom 50% is making about 12% of the wealth, but only paying 3% of the taxes. There's just not much to cut there.

The rich are actually paying greater percentage of the total taxes now (as of 2006) even though their tax rates have gone down. My understanding is that there are two reasons:

1. Their actual income has increased because they have been able to invest more of their money.
2. Their reported income has increased because they're less likely to seek out tax shelters or other loopholes.

I know it's easy to lie through statistics, but I promise this is a good-faith effort to describe the truth with my limited economic knowledge and time to sift through data. If you see a flaw in my analysis, please let me know.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top