The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

@sozobe,

When it comes to voting between Obama and Perry, most people are going to remember Perry's "social security is a ponzi scheme" statement. Even retired conservatives depend on social security for their livelihood, and they also have children who have been paying into the system.

I think that 11% lead is misleading (too small), and we'll have to wait until next November to find out. Votes are what counts; not polls this early before the election.

3 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

I think that 11% lead is misleading (too small),

That was my point -- Obama's beating him by 11 points already.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

Perry does seem to be asking us to overlook a few things too many. Everybody is going to have some freight, but he's got more than the usual burden.

I happen to like Christie, but I think this may be four years too soon. If he can stay on course, he might even be in position to knock off a sitting president of his own party.

1 Reply

@sozobe,

sozobe wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:
I think that 11% lead is misleading (too small),

That was my point -- Obama's beating him by 11 points already.

An alternative view

Quote:

Editor's note: James Carville is a Democratic strategist who serves as a political contributor for CNN, appearing frequently on CNN's "The Situation Room" as well as other programs on all CNN networks. Carville remains active in Democratic politics and is a party fundraiser.
(CNN) -- People often ask me what advice I would give the White House about various things. Today I was mulling over election results from New York and Nevada while thinking about that very question. What should the White House do now? One word came to mind: Panic.
We are far past sending out talking points. Do not attempt to dumb it down. We cannot stand any more explanations. Have you talked to any Democratic senators lately? I have. It's pretty damn clear they are not happy campers.
This is what I would say to President Barack Obama: The time has come to demand a plan of action that requires a complete change from the direction you are headed.

1. Fire somebody

2. Indict people.

3. Make a case like a Democrat

4. Hold fast to an explanation.

As I watch the Republican debates, I realize that we are on the brink of a crazy person running our nation. I sit in front of the television and shudder at the thought of one of these creationism-loving, global-warming-denying, immigration-bashing, Social-Security-cutting, clean-air-hating, mortality-fascinated, Wall-Street-protecting Republicans running my country.
The course we are on is not working. The hour is late, and the need is great.

Fire. Indict. Fight.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/09/14/opinion/carville-white-house-advice/index.html?hpt=hp_bn9

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

That's not about Perry, which is what we were talking about.

As to the new subject, eh. I think Carville's trying to get relevant again. But then again hyperbole is kind of his thing, so maybe he doesn't have any ulterior motives and is just being hyperbolic as per usual.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

most people are going to remember Perry's "social security is a ponzi scheme" statement.

Perry stated a fact and I think it's awesome that most people will remember this.

Only those living in a fantasy, make believe, alternate world don't agree that SS is in fact a Ponzi scheme.

0 Replies

@sozobe,

Quote:

That's not about Perry, which is what we were talking about.

When you said that Obama is up 11 points ALREADY you were saying that everything is fine for Obama against Perry, that he is 11 above now and will go higher.....there is no other reason to use "already" instead of some version of "now"....

Carville most certainly does not agree, and his reputation as a skilled Democratic strategist is intact.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

When it comes to voting between Obama and Perry, most people are going to remember Perry's "social security is a ponzi scheme" statement.

It will continue to get attention, because while ordinary folk have largely assumed for 20 years that SS would not be around when they got ready to use it because the promised payouts are unsustainable almost to a man politicians have not been willing to admit this. Perry will in the end get credit for straight talking, for being willing to admit problems which is the first step towards solving problems...something we have not had in leadership for awhile. Look at Obama for instance, he is out saying there is no problem with SS and his debt cutting ideas will not touch SS now or ever....he is not a credible problem solver because he will not even admit to us what we are fairly certain we already know, and have known for a long time.

1 Reply

@roger,

roger wrote:

Perry does seem to be asking us to overlook a few things too many. Everybody is going to have some freight, but he's got more than the usual burden.

I happen to like Christie, but I think this may be four years too soon. If he can stay on course, he might even be in position to knock off a sitting president of his own party.

Chrisite is dangerous - a loose cannon. On one hand, I dislike his politics, but on the other, I do like the guy personally and his outspoken nature.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

there is no other reason to use "already" instead of some version of "now"....

Yes there is. Did you see my post at the bottom of last page?

I'm saying that Obama's negatives are already known, while people are still getting to know Perry. And he's not wearing well. The margin of Obama beating him, according to polls, is growing.

CI said something about the polls being early, and I said yes, that was my point. If Perry is losing by that much already -- when there is a lot that people don't know about him -- then that doesn't bode well for him.

Meanwhile, Carville was behind the curve in the 2008 election. He thought Hillary had it in the bag for quite a while.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Carville most certainly does not agree, and his reputation as a skilled Democratic strategist is intact.

Intact with whom, exactly? His predictions are almost always wrong (he's the left-wing version of Dick Morris) and he was a top architect of Clinton's Triangulation strategy - something which Obama isn't going with.

He's part of the DLC, Republican-lite wing of the Dem party. I think Obama would be much better served to do the opposite of whatever Carville recommends.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Quote:

It will continue to get attention, because while ordinary folk have largely assumed for 20 years that SS would not be around when they got ready to use it because the promised payouts are unsustainable almost to a man politicians have not been willing to admit this.

'Regular folks' are totally wrong, then, because what you describe is a bullshit lie. SS isn't unsustainable in the slightest in the time frame you are describing.

The 2011 report - and this is more pessimistic than it used to be due to the recession and lowered receipts - still predicts 'full solvency' up until 2036. After that, we will actually have to start paying IOU's back out of the general fund instead of stealing from the trust fund, as we have been for years. If you started working in 1990 and worked a typical 45-year career, you would retire in 2025 - a full 10 years before the supposed 'solvency' drop-dead date occurs. And extremely minor changes to the formula can extend that date by 20 to 30 years or more.

You complain a lot, but you simply aren't accurate in what you are complaining about. This is one of the reasons why us elites don't trust the common man to run ****: you lack accuracy in your judgement and don't bother researching stuff before putting your two cents in about what should be done.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

The 2011 report - and this is more pessimistic than it used to be due to the recession and lowered receipts - still predicts 'full solvency' up until 2036.After that, we will actually have to start paying IOU's back out of the general fund instead of stealing from the trust fund

The IOU's run out in 2036, but the SS system adding debt to the federal government rather than contributing a bonus starts now. It is moved up a few years because so many older people who can not find work are taking early retirement.

Quote:

The bursting of the real estate bubble and the ensuing recession have hurt jobs, home prices and now Social Security.

This year, the system will pay out more in benefits than it receives in payroll taxes, an important threshold it was not expected to cross until at least 2016, according to the Congressional Budget Office

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/25/business/economy/25social.html

You Cyclo are factually incorrect...which is nothing new.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

In addition to the early retirements, Obama cut social security taxes that will extend into next year.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

That data doesn't conflict with the 'full solvency' report from the SS administration. I suggest you read the 2011 trustees report before telling others they don't know what they are talking about - like I did.

Or, you could just keep running your ignorant mouth off, without doing so. I predict that's what you'll do instead. And you wonder why I disdain the idea of letting the 'common joe,' who you apparently believe you represent, run the show.

Regardless of our argument about solvency, the fact remains that anyone in the 90's who thought SS wouldn't be there for them when they retired was quite ignorant of the reality of the situation. So when politicians don't go on about it, it's not because they are unable to do so, but because... you are incorrect.

Cycloptichorn

2 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

Quote:

This is one of the reasons why us elites don't trust the common man to run ****: you lack accuracy in your judgement and don't bother researching stuff before putting your two cents in about what should be done.

Yeah, you going around denying irrefutable stuff like "the US is a terrorist nation" when there is voluminous data that shows that to be the case.

Then when you've been caught out you make up silly, off the cuff arguments that a 10 year old wouldn't even dream of making.

You common guys - we "elites" don't trust you as far as we can throw you.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

In addition to the early retirements, Obama cut social security taxes that will extend into next year.

Ya, and wages are going down big time, both due to not working and working for less. The big blow is early retirement though as I understand it, the baby boom bubble has hit the claims department a few years before it was supposed to...we have been talking about this problem for 30 years but we never got around to solving it, and now it is too late. The Boomers we never given the heads up that their SS payout will be cut, they have not saved enough even if SS were to make the promised payouts, and they are politically strong enough (in large part because the young are timid and tend not to vote or to be wealthy) to get what they want even though it will kill the country.

EDIT: I notice with alarm that Perry clearly does not think that the Boomers are willing to compromise on SS for the good of the country, that he reads the lay of the land as that the Boomers will demand and have the political power to get their promised money no matter how difficult or impossible paying in full this debt will make life for those who are still working....and for the kids.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Cycloptichorn wrote:

That data doesn't conflict with the 'full solvency' report from the SS administration. I suggest you read the 2011 trustees report before telling others they don't know what they are talking about - like I did.

Or, you could just keep running your ignorant mouth off, without doing so. I predict that's what you'll do instead. And you wonder why I disdain the idea of letting the 'common joe,' who you apparently believe you represent, run the show.

You would do your reputation good if you would admit that you have been proven to be factually wrong, rather that pitching turds. You continue to act like a know it all child, you clearly have a VERY inflated opinion of your intelligence, and are blind to your emotional immaturity.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

Hawk: your article is dated 2010. The 2011 trustee's report, however, still predicts 'full solvency' until 2036, just as I wrote. Your attempt at a 'gotcha' has totally failed. It's nothing more than an ancillary point, anyway - the truth is that someone in 1990 who didn't think SS would be there when they retired was totally wrong and had very little knowledge of how the program works. Hell, I'm a lot younger than that hypothetical person, and I fully believe that SS will be there when I retire. But that's because I've looked into it, instead of just spouting off my mouth about it, like you do.

I know you get pissy when others reveal that you have no real in-depth knowledge on this or any issue, but that's hardly my fault.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Spot on! The average retirement savings for those 60 years and older is less than $200k. There's no way they're going to survive with only social security.

As a matter of fact, Perry is going to back-track about social security being an ponzi scheme before the election, because his advisers are going to tell him that's a self-inflected death wish in politics.

1 Reply

The Republican Nomination For President: The Race For The Race For The White House

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know