Ableton Forum

Tone Deft wrote:ChiDJ - you still haven't said a goddamn thing about real politics.

me not self made? fuck yourself.


post some positives about McCain...

Positives? They are both politicians... I still say we go to the bar!

This just got more interesting.

Sarah Palin was the perfect choice for McCain!

He's blurred the line even further for the undecideds.

Her qualifications mean nothing. Her gender means everything.

This just keeps getting better.

Adonis,

Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice. I'm more keen on how the masses perceive each candidate's impact on their daily lives and spending habits.

feel me?

Machinesworking wrote:

knotkranky wrote:Holy shit, Obama will definitely be president. It's a lock! McCain's vp pick Sarah Palin will be a disaster for the republicans and I bet they don't even want him as president anymore, lol.

Don't count on it. She's pretty, and people are simple minded that way. That's what they're counting on for sure. Her husband and her are hardcore blue color republicans, that do appeal to the swing voters. Whether anybody is ready to lead? whatever, it's not a four year kingdom, there are all kinds of factors that go into any real decision making, and part of the government that aren't affected by whatever president is in power.

Anyway I hope you're right, but I don't think so.

Of course you could be right, but this stranger of woman is a heartbeat away from the presidency and america has 60 days to get it. F'ing scary and the dems will play with that, among many other things all the way to the bank. It's just one of many debate points. The RNC spin machine is gonna have to work overtime on this, but certainly it's a very risky move by McCain. Why did he feel he had to roll the dice like that? As an Obama supporter, I love the pick.

Is there only two political partys in the states?

Tone Deft wrote:ChiDJ - you still haven't said a goddamn thing about real politics.

me not self made? fuck yourself.


post some positives about McCain...

Tone,

Touchy a bit?

I wasn't referring to you. Wait, yes I was, (Slacker). You're missing my point again. Step away from the bong slowly and listen....

I'm not arguing policy. That's all smoke and mirrors. The guy with the best light show wins. McCain just upped his pyrotechnic budget with his VP choice.

I'll sit back and wait for the guitar solo. In other words, I'm on the fence with my choice.

Rock on!

ChiDJ wrote: I vote economically.

I'm not calling you out but you said this ^

then you said this

ChiDJ wrote:
Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice.

In my opinion, on an economic front, a leader that instills confidence in firms that the economy will be strong means more will be produced i.e. more jobs will be created

The republicans have had their chance and that confidence is low

while the economy is growing - 2nd qtr real GDP numbers are at 1.9% (they haven't been revised yet) people are still losing their jobs and wages are not keeping up with inflation

^ that in my opinion equals low confidence in the economic policy of the current administration

I'm the biggest free market advocate and I honestly believe the less government the better but the economic policies of the republican party have hurt everyone

the idea is give tax breaks to big firms. Then they can hire more and produce more right?

well they can get the tax breaks but if other factors such as low confidence are not influencing them to do just that (hire more and produce more ) we need a change

you're an ass, you've posted nothing but opinion and hollow rants.

on the fence? omfg the dumbest of the dumb.

slacker? put up or shut up, what the fuck is so great about you? you're a DJ and you live in a shit midwestern town, you can't write political commentary, you don't even know what's going on.

djadonis206 wrote:

ChiDJ wrote: I vote economically.

I'm not calling you out but you said this ^

then you said this

ChiDJ wrote:
Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice.

PWNED.

Grifter wrote:Is there only two political partys in the states?

Nope, and people seem to forget that.

Moody wrote:

Grifter wrote:Is there only two political partys in the states?

Nope, and people seem to forget that.

Thank you very much!

djadonis206 wrote:

ChiDJ wrote: I vote economically.

I'm not calling you out but you said this ^

then you said this

ChiDJ wrote:
Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice.

In my opinion, on an economic front, a leader that instills confidence in firms that the economy will be strong means more will be produced i.e. more jobs will be created

The republicans have had their chance and that confidence is low

while the economy is growing - 2nd qtr real GDP numbers are at 1.9% (they haven't been revised yet) people are still losing their jobs and wages are not keeping up with inflation

^ that in my opinion equals low confidence in the economic policy of the current administration

I'm the biggest free market advocate and I honestly believe the less government the better but the economic policies of the republican party have hurt everyone

the idea is give tax breaks to big firms they can hire more produce more right

well they can get the tax breaks but if other factors such as low confidence are not influencing them to do just that we need a change

Good Points!

No, I'm not contradicting myself. You kind of spelled it out in your response. Regardless of Obama's economic policies, it's surely a change from the current policy which obviously has not been successful.

Again, it boils down to the masses belief that, "different" is better. The specifics of each candidate's policy is irrelevant in the general election.

The change occurs when the "NEW" leader is sworn into office. People will then expect change and the economy will finally move forward.

ChiDJ wrote:

djadonis206 wrote:

ChiDJ wrote: I vote economically.

I'm not calling you out but you said this ^

then you said this

ChiDJ wrote:
Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice.

In my opinion, on an economic front, a leader that instills confidence in firms that the economy will be strong means more will be produced i.e. more jobs will be created

The republicans have had their chance and that confidence is low

while the economy is growing - 2nd qtr real GDP numbers are at 1.9% (they haven't been revised yet) people are still losing their jobs and wages are not keeping up with inflation

^ that in my opinion equals low confidence in the economic policy of the current administration

I'm the biggest free market advocate and I honestly believe the less government the better but the economic policies of the republican party have hurt everyone

the idea is give tax breaks to big firms they can hire more produce more right

well they can get the tax breaks but if other factors such as low confidence are not influencing them to do just that we need a change

Good Points!

No, I'm not contradicting myself. You kind of spelled it out in your response. Regardless of Obama's economic policies, it's surely a change from the current policy which obviously has not been successful.

Again, it boils down to the masses belief that, "different" is better. The specifics of each candidate's policy is irrelevant in the general election.

The change occurs when the "NEW" leader is sworn into office. People will then expect change and the economy will finally move forward.

That is an interesting approach but, I am doubting this process is what is going to move the economy forward.

ChiDJ wrote:

djadonis206 wrote:

ChiDJ wrote: I vote economically.

I'm not calling you out but you said this ^

then you said this

ChiDJ wrote:
Frankly, their economic policies have minimal impact on my choice.

In my opinion, on an economic front, a leader that instills confidence in firms that the economy will be strong means more will be produced i.e. more jobs will be created

The republicans have had their chance and that confidence is low

while the economy is growing - 2nd qtr real GDP numbers are at 1.9% (they haven't been revised yet) people are still losing their jobs and wages are not keeping up with inflation

^ that in my opinion equals low confidence in the economic policy of the current administration

I'm the biggest free market advocate and I honestly believe the less government the better but the economic policies of the republican party have hurt everyone

the idea is give tax breaks to big firms they can hire more produce more right

well they can get the tax breaks but if other factors such as low confidence are not influencing them to do just that we need a change

Good Points!

No, I'm not contradicting myself. You kind of spelled it out in your response. Regardless of Obama's economic policies, it's surely a change from the current policy which obviously has not been successful.

Again, it boils down to the masses belief that, "different" is better. The specifics of each candidate's policy is irrelevant in the general election.

The change occurs when the "NEW" leader is sworn into office. People will then expect change and the economy will finally move forward.

What change ?

Moody, what do you suggest?


Grifter, the change is in leadership and confidence

Consumers and suppliers respond to things such as leadership, expectations, and perception

djadonis206 wrote:Moody, what do you suggest?


Grifter, the change is in leadership and confidence

Consumers and suppliers respond to things such as leadership, expectations, and perception

Confidence in consumerism is going to help aint it

Suppliers


Cigars in China are rolled up and smoking

Not to be condescending but do you know how economics works?

Consumers and suppliers make up the economy

I don't smoke, fyi