Originally posted by telerion
Whodey, I've got to correct you here. The high unemployment rate has next to nothing to do with Obama. You could have put in McCain, Palin, or (supposing we had a time machine) Ronald Reagan. We'd still have unemployment near 10%.

Also where are the tax increases that Obama has put in the tax code? Maybe in the future taxes will increase, but so far he hasn't been increasing taxes.

I did not say that Obama was responsible for the high unemployment, however, he is the man in charge when it all hit the fan just as was "W" was in charge when the credit crisis hit so "W" was blamed just like Obama is being blamed now. McCain was ahead in the polls right before the credit crisis hit and I think is the main reason Obama won. Simply put McCain was penalized for being in the same party as "W". McCain was not only linked to "W" being in charge when it all hit the fan, (not that "W" was even responsible), but McCain said stupid things before the credit crisis like the fact that the economy way perfectly fine. This gave McCain the appearance that he was clueless and inept and out of touch. Likewise, Obama has made similar stupid statements. He first said that the unemployment rate would not exceed 8% and now it is 10%. He also said his stimulus package would create millions of jobs which is also a falsehood, at least till this point.

As far as tax increases go, the policies I am referring to are the ones he is pushing such as health care reform and cap and trade etc. These are not direct taxes but we will be having more money fly out of our pockets nonetheless if Obama and the Dems have their way. In addition, the out of control spending is an issue. People are retarded if they think that there is no correlation between increased spending and higher taxes. Like "W", Obama spends like a drunken sailor with no means to pay for it. This will leave future administrations little choice but to raise taxes in the future.

Originally posted by whodey
This will leave future administrations little choice but to raise taxes in the future.

we could default on the Chinese T-bills, instead.

Originally posted by Melanerpes
If they had done an Obama-McCain do-over election this year, I'm sure Obama would still have won in NJ -- perhaps the margin would have been a bit narrower, but Obama likely still wins by at least 10 points.

I think one thing going for Obama was that lots of people liked him last year (and still do), and made a special effort to get out and vote for hi ...[text shortened]... way. For awhile, it looked like Daggett was going to mess up this strategy, but he didn't.

Obama would still take NJ, yes. But I think the margin might very well be less than 10 points... Kerry beat bush in NJ by only 6 in '04.

Corzine did win fairly big in '05. so, even if you don't want to compare Obama to Corzine, you can still compare Corzine to Corzine.

Originally posted by zeeblebot
we could default on the Chinese T-bills, instead.

Maybe we should have another Boston T-party. 😀