Jobless Rate Falls to 7.8%, Lowest Since January 2009 (and it's not because of people leaving the wo - Polidicks

I'm thinking he may try to prepare better, but because Romney isn't on his side, he'll still be unable to defend himself. for example, if foreign policy is brought up, Romney may just hit Obama on the lack of security at our embassy that got hit and the fact that one of out ambassadors died during that. He might Also hit him on Obama going to Vegas instead of putting his campaign on hold for at least that day and do his job as the President. I also expect MSNBC to Explode in anger again because Obama didn't use the Democratic Talking points, the 49% video, Bain Capital, or anything else they though would be a hit against Romney. Also, Are you sure we were watching the same debate? To me it looked like "the Great Orator" didn't have any ears.

He can defend himself perfectly fine. I see it more as an issue of Obama showing up prepared for a debate, not a shouting match.

[QUOTE=Glaber;37953101]I'm thinking he may try to prepare better, but because Romney isn't on his side, he'll still be unable to defend himself.[/QUOTE] I'm really not getting the point that this sentence is trying to make. Obama will not be able to defend himself because him and romney are not buddies? duh. [editline]7th October 2012[/editline] Also Obama can do his job basically anywhere.

we'll see how the debate goes. To the second point, security is primarily on the tab of local police, always has been. Not to say they don't have a small security force but it isn't a militia of their own. And how is it obama's fault that a bunch of idiots watched a publicly televised news article about a b-movie some asshat made in america then threw up a riot? And wasn't there some big conspiracy about how the death of the diplomat (which was a result of a second riot, not the initial wave (where no one got hurt)) was potentially part of a bigger plan and they just took advantage of the news to make a move? That whole situation has been hazy depending on what news sources you read into. I too expect a lot of bickering over the fact he didn't make a move on the 47% thing or mention bain. I'm curious what was in his plan for the debate at all, though he probably weighed what he felt was important to talk about for the start and either set those topics off for later, or is intentionally waiting til the end to deliver a big hit if he knows something that hasn't been mentioned before. I'm curious where this will go, though I can definitely say that now we've gone through the first one obama is going to have a lot more power to whatever comes next. As for the VP debate, ridge you're an idiot. Sure he made an observation of a common stereotype, that has nothing to do with anything short of dog whistle politics, which is pretty much this entire campaign season on both sides right now

[QUOTE=Reserved Parkin;37944448]This seems to be good. Is it just me, or does it seem even having a basic 4 year college degree these days isn't worth shit for getting jobs? Trade school degrees seem to be getting more valuable than regular college degrees in terms of job stability.[/QUOTE] Yes, mostly for 2 reasons: 1. 4 year colleges don't teach shit that is useful for jobs, especially with regards to quantitative skills. It's not a coincidence that engineers/science majors have an easier time looking for jobs than humanities majors. My college used to have such a ridiculously light math requirement (basically a simple high school level stat class) for everyone, that some students are really underprepared for the level of analysis they'll be using afterwards. 2. American college graduates as a whole are overpaid, more so for the top 10-20 private universities. Bill Gross wrote a pretty good article a while back on this phenomenon. Basically, American college students aren't substantially different from everywhere else in the world: they spend the majority of their time partying and slacking off, and only cram for exams/rip stuff off google when it comes to exams/term paper deadlines. Yet, many college graduates (including myself and most of my peers) expect a $60K+ job out of school.

[QUOTE=zerothefallen;37951745]Is ridge like glaber levels of stupid? I don't get how they can be this stupid. I seriously don't.[/QUOTE] It's actually kind of strange. They both post in the same kind of threads, post the same anti-obama, "liberal media" conspiracy crap, and (for some time) they both had the same girl's cartoon character as their avatars. I'm gonna go with a clone.

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;37954682]It's actually kind of strange. They both post in the same kind of threads, post the same anti-obama, "liberal media" conspiracy crap, and (for some time) they both had the same girl's cartoon character as their avatars. I'm gonna go with a clone.[/QUOTE] I haven't made any liberal media comments at all. Maybe you guys should take a look at how your view things instead of assuming the other guy views this, without him ever saying anything to suggest it? [editline]7th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Habsburg;37948033]I can forgive him for that[/QUOTE] Of course you can. He's "your guy."

[QUOTE=Ridge;37956032]Of course you can. He's "your guy."[/QUOTE] I don't think you understand the difference between [b]being a racist[/b] and making a statement about something so actually common that it's a stereotype. Definitely wasn't the best example to give though, it was inarguably a gaffe- no questions there. speaking of, has anyone heard the word gaffe [i]ever[/i] before this election season?

[QUOTE=Ridge;37956032]Of course you can. He's "your guy."[/QUOTE] Also his actions don't strike me as racist

[QUOTE=Habsburg;37959435]Also his actions don't strike me as racist[/QUOTE] But disliking Obama because he's inept [i]is[/i] racist?

[QUOTE=Ridge;37959455]But disliking Obama because he's inept [i]is[/i] racist?[/QUOTE] you do realize you're the only one in this thread who's brought up and continued on racism

[QUOTE=Ridge;37959455]But disliking Obama because he's inept [i]is[/i] racist?[/QUOTE] Yes please turn in your ku klux klan robes and walk into this padded cell [editline]8th October 2012[/editline] Get ready to watch 2 day's worth of Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher and Michael Moore.

[QUOTE=Habsburg;37960894]Get ready to watch 2 day's worth of Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher and Michael Moore.[/QUOTE] Cruel and unusual punishment is outlawed by the Constitution.

Not in obama's america you commie

to the earlier commentary with glaber about Obama not bringing up the 47% bit, it turns out romney was, amongst many other things (like 'zingers', which he said he'd been practicing since August), prepared with a turn-around explanation/apology for that and was waiting for Obama to bring it up, that should have been pretty obvious. He went on Fox the next day and started giving his points on that stance, but the key thing is if Obama called him out for it [i]at the debate[/i], Romney would have had the chance to sit and pretend he was sorry/say he misspoke/didn't really mean it about it in front of a HUGE audience of both parties and independents. Now he was forced to just give his side of it to a smaller television crowd of people who've heard the same points from fox reports, and are most likely siding with him anyways. Pretty good tactic for the president compared to just coming forth like people keep saying he should have to say "WHAT ABOUT YOUR 47% GAFFE? CHECKMATE ROMNEY". Wouldn't have played well if he just dove in on that, even without a prepared rebuttal.