To contact us Click HERE
Larry Johnson - Calling Bill Clinton a liar is akin to labeling Willy Sutton a bank robber or Bernie Maddoff a fraudster. It is a simple matter of fact. Now, he is one hell of a charming liar and does it with a grace and style that is unmatched. But once you scrap off the crapola and spooge, the actual truth is quite different from the Clinton view of reality.
Republicans were quick to jump on this:
The prevarication of Obama and the Democrats, though, is something far more serious. They are insisting that the economy is better and, after stemming the Bush hemorraghe, they’ve been creating jobs like Keebler elves baking cookies.
Well, let’s go to the acutal numbers (pull them for yourself at bls.gov). In January 2009 there were 142,187,000 employed. By December 2009, the end of Obama’s first 12 months in office, the number of employed stood at 137,968,000. If you have trouble with math, let me help you out–this is a loss of 4,219,000 jobs. Do we blame Obama for all of those? Probably not.
So the low point in job loss was December 2009. As of July 2012, the number of employed in the United States was 142,220,000. How many jobs have been added under Obama, starting with December 2009 as the baseline low? Four million two hundred fifty two thousand (4,252,000). That works out to an average of 133,000 jobs per month.
However, in terms of net jobs created? Obama is 33,000 jobs better at the end of July then when he took office.
But let’s take a look at the change in the civilian non-institutional population growth. During Bush’s first term, the civilian non-institutional population, i.e., those 16 and over capable of working, grew by 9,308,000. Divide that over 43 months and the potential labor market or, more simply stated, those who may want a job, increased by over 216,465 per month. If you look at the average number of jobs created each month during this period, you will find that the economy under Bush was generating 126,000 jobs per month.
What about Obama? During his first 43 months, the non-institutional civilian population increased by 8,615,000. That is an average of 200,348.
How about Ronald Reagan, who inherited a struggling economy from the inept Jimmy Carter? During Reagan’s first 43 months the civilian non-institutional population grew by 7,336,000, which averages out to 170,604 new souls per month. During that period, Reagan created 5,480,000 jobs (which means an average of 127,441 per month).
Think these numbers are irrelevant or meaningless? Baloney. If our economy was churning out 300,000 jobs a month over the last year you can bet your house or your first born that Obama would be doing handsprings on his way to an easy re-election. But the facts are otherwise. Not only is job creation anemic, but the credit markets, especially for small businesses, are still frozen and unresponsive. Only those with the highest credit ratings can get loans and even those prospective buyers are subjected to a scrutiny usually reserved for convicted felons.
Let’s see Obama run on his record. I can’t wait to see the Democrats argue across the country that the economy is doing well. It isn’t. Bad news for Obama? The Republicans are poised to hit him with the big guns. They have not yet begun to fight.
13 Ekim 2012 Cumartesi
Obama Will Be Re-Elected Dispite A Failed Presidency
To contact us Click HERE
Ira Stol - Call it the Obama paradox: He’s been a failure as a president, but he looks headed for re-election, anyway.
Sure, things could change between now and November if there’s a stock-market plunge, a scandal, an Iranian nuclear test, or a truly game-changing moment in one of the presidential debates.
It’s possible the polls showing Mr. Obama leading Mitt Romney both nationwide and in battleground states are all inaccurate, or that a final tidal wave of television commercials by the Romney campaign and its allies will be able to change the dynamic of the campaign, the same way Mr. Romney recovered after surges by Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum in the primaries.
But if Mr. Obama is re-elected, how can it possibly be explained?
The answer is somewhere in these three plausible story lines:
The voters are re-electing Obama-Boehner, not Obama-Biden. The President Barack Obama who’s leading in the polls isn’t the overreaching president of the first two years of his term, the Obama of the stimulus bill, the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” bill, and Obamacare.
That President Obama disappeared, or at least was hidden away, on Election Day 2010, to be replaced for the most part by the President Obama who worked with the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, to extend the Bush income tax cuts for two years, add a payroll tax cut, keep Guantanamo open, and ratify free trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, and South Korea.
The stock market, as measured by the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index, is up about 20 percent since Election Day 2010. Healthcare costs and energy costs are leveling off.
By re-electing a Republican House, voters are rejecting President Obama’s argument that things would be better without the Republican obstructionists. They’re saying, instead, that they like the obstructed Obama better than the unobstructed one, and that the combination of a Republican House and President Obama might be something better than a failure.
A second story line is that Romney is a terrible candidate.
This is partly personal, partly policy. Mr. Romney served one four-year term as governor of Massachusetts. He never won the popular ratification that comes with re-election or even with having a hand-picked successor win re-election. His public-sector achievements are so thin that, at the Republican National Convention, he was reduced to trotting out Olympic medalists in the sports of women’s skeet shooting and women’s skeleton to testify to his work on the 2002 Winter Olympics.
John Kennedy swam three miles in shark-infested waters towing an injured shipmate; John McCain survived five and a half years of torture in North Vietnamese prisons; Mitt Romney saved short-course speed skating in Salt Lake City.
Mr. Romney is gaffe-prone: “I like being able to fire people;” “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”
Mr. Romney’s most significant public achievements — the Massachusetts healthcare law that expanded insurance coverage through a mandate and the John and Abigail Adams scholarships to state colleges and universities in the Bay State — don’t contrast well against either Obamacare or President Obama’s Pell Grant expansion. Voters looking for a candidate to expand health coverage and college access with taxpayer money figure they might as well stick with Mr. Obama.
Mr. Romney did not mention his tax-cutting plans in his convention speech, avoided tax simplification as an issue, and was vague about his plan to reduce tax breaks for upper-income taxpayers (another issue on which he agrees with President Obama.) He ran promising to spend more on Medicare than President Obama would, and praising McCain-Feingold-style campaign spending limits.
Generationally, Mr. Romney, 65 years old and gray at the temples, is an odd choice to deliver a message about federal debt reduction. Younger Republicans, like Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan, connect better with the younger voters who will have to pay off the debt, and those next-generation politicians may have their chance to do so in the 2016 Republican presidential primary campaign.
Mr. Romney’s economic message was so gloomy that he sometimes sounded like a candidate trying to get elected entirely with the votes of the 8 percent of Americans who are unemployed.
By this line of explanation, the rejection of Mr. Romney is not so much a rejection of the Republican Party or of conservative or free-market policies or ideas, but of Mr. Romney and his particularly odd campaign.
The third possible explanation is one I hope is not true, but that lurks as a fear in the minds of many of those dismayed by the polls. That is that the “takers” have started to outnumber, and outvote, the “makers.”
Add together the 46.7 million Americans on food stamps, the 8.7 million Americans receiving Pell Grants, the 7.6 million unionized government employees, and weigh them against the top 5 percent of income earners, the roughly 7 million taxpayers making more than about $154,000 a year, who earn about 32 percent of the adjusted gross income and pay about 59 percent of the nation’s individual income taxes.
We have all kinds of systems and laws in America for protecting the rights of unpopular minorities, but no one has quite figured out how to prevent an election from devolving into “four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
Margaret Thatcher said socialists “always run out of other people’s money.” Charles Prince, then head of Citigroup, said in 2007, “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing.”
A worst-case scenario is that the 2012 election will be remembered as one in which voters thought the music was still playing and danced away, only to discover before long that the other people’s money had run out.
Sure, things could change between now and November if there’s a stock-market plunge, a scandal, an Iranian nuclear test, or a truly game-changing moment in one of the presidential debates.
It’s possible the polls showing Mr. Obama leading Mitt Romney both nationwide and in battleground states are all inaccurate, or that a final tidal wave of television commercials by the Romney campaign and its allies will be able to change the dynamic of the campaign, the same way Mr. Romney recovered after surges by Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum in the primaries.
But if Mr. Obama is re-elected, how can it possibly be explained?
The answer is somewhere in these three plausible story lines:
The voters are re-electing Obama-Boehner, not Obama-Biden. The President Barack Obama who’s leading in the polls isn’t the overreaching president of the first two years of his term, the Obama of the stimulus bill, the Dodd-Frank financial “reform” bill, and Obamacare.
That President Obama disappeared, or at least was hidden away, on Election Day 2010, to be replaced for the most part by the President Obama who worked with the Republican Speaker of the House, John Boehner, to extend the Bush income tax cuts for two years, add a payroll tax cut, keep Guantanamo open, and ratify free trade agreements with Panama, Colombia, and South Korea.
The stock market, as measured by the Standard and Poor’s 500 Index, is up about 20 percent since Election Day 2010. Healthcare costs and energy costs are leveling off.
By re-electing a Republican House, voters are rejecting President Obama’s argument that things would be better without the Republican obstructionists. They’re saying, instead, that they like the obstructed Obama better than the unobstructed one, and that the combination of a Republican House and President Obama might be something better than a failure.
A second story line is that Romney is a terrible candidate.
This is partly personal, partly policy. Mr. Romney served one four-year term as governor of Massachusetts. He never won the popular ratification that comes with re-election or even with having a hand-picked successor win re-election. His public-sector achievements are so thin that, at the Republican National Convention, he was reduced to trotting out Olympic medalists in the sports of women’s skeet shooting and women’s skeleton to testify to his work on the 2002 Winter Olympics.
John Kennedy swam three miles in shark-infested waters towing an injured shipmate; John McCain survived five and a half years of torture in North Vietnamese prisons; Mitt Romney saved short-course speed skating in Salt Lake City.
Mr. Romney is gaffe-prone: “I like being able to fire people;” “I’m not concerned about the very poor.”
Mr. Romney’s most significant public achievements — the Massachusetts healthcare law that expanded insurance coverage through a mandate and the John and Abigail Adams scholarships to state colleges and universities in the Bay State — don’t contrast well against either Obamacare or President Obama’s Pell Grant expansion. Voters looking for a candidate to expand health coverage and college access with taxpayer money figure they might as well stick with Mr. Obama.
Mr. Romney did not mention his tax-cutting plans in his convention speech, avoided tax simplification as an issue, and was vague about his plan to reduce tax breaks for upper-income taxpayers (another issue on which he agrees with President Obama.) He ran promising to spend more on Medicare than President Obama would, and praising McCain-Feingold-style campaign spending limits.
Generationally, Mr. Romney, 65 years old and gray at the temples, is an odd choice to deliver a message about federal debt reduction. Younger Republicans, like Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan, connect better with the younger voters who will have to pay off the debt, and those next-generation politicians may have their chance to do so in the 2016 Republican presidential primary campaign.
Mr. Romney’s economic message was so gloomy that he sometimes sounded like a candidate trying to get elected entirely with the votes of the 8 percent of Americans who are unemployed.
By this line of explanation, the rejection of Mr. Romney is not so much a rejection of the Republican Party or of conservative or free-market policies or ideas, but of Mr. Romney and his particularly odd campaign.
The third possible explanation is one I hope is not true, but that lurks as a fear in the minds of many of those dismayed by the polls. That is that the “takers” have started to outnumber, and outvote, the “makers.”
Add together the 46.7 million Americans on food stamps, the 8.7 million Americans receiving Pell Grants, the 7.6 million unionized government employees, and weigh them against the top 5 percent of income earners, the roughly 7 million taxpayers making more than about $154,000 a year, who earn about 32 percent of the adjusted gross income and pay about 59 percent of the nation’s individual income taxes.
We have all kinds of systems and laws in America for protecting the rights of unpopular minorities, but no one has quite figured out how to prevent an election from devolving into “four wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.”
Margaret Thatcher said socialists “always run out of other people’s money.” Charles Prince, then head of Citigroup, said in 2007, “as long as the music is playing, you’ve got to get up and dance. We’re still dancing.”
A worst-case scenario is that the 2012 election will be remembered as one in which voters thought the music was still playing and danced away, only to discover before long that the other people’s money had run out.
Why Obama Will Lose To Romney
To contact us Click HERE
Two years later we are again about five weeks away from an election. The media and the pollsters would have you believe that Obama has a lock on being re-elected. The public knew much less about Obama then than they do now. It is incredible to me that pollsters are publishing (with a straight and serious face) the numbers they are. Look for these pollsters to move toward reality as the election nears, not because they will have a clearer vision but because they will eventually be judged in terms of their accuracy during the few weeks preceding the election (especially their last polls). These last polls are their samples for future business. They will change because they value future business more than Obama’s re-election.
There may be a closure effect in the media as well, although it will be less easy to spot. The media publishes qualitative rather than quantitative substance, which somewhat protects them from the clear-cut conclusions that can be drawn against quantitative data. Many media people seem immune to shame and unconcerned about their reputations. The alternative hypothesis of stupidity is also a possibility. Living in their own world, their errors are reinforced by fellow thinkers.
Nevertheless, some members of the media will realize what is coming and abandon their positions rather than go down with the Obama ship. Watch them in the last two weeks preceding the election to see the hedging and perhaps a Road to Damascus conversion or two.
Regardless of how the pollsters and media react, I have no basis to change what was written two years ago. If anything, matters have gotten worse for the Democrats and Obama. Obama’s “magic” is gone. Those who were infatuated by him four years ago are disappointed, disillusioned and possibly angry. Many of them will not vote for him again.
Blacks are disillusioned as their “Great Black Hope” has made their lives more, not less, miserable. They will turn out in smaller numbers this time. College students who came out in droves to vote for the rock star are now jobless, living at home with their parents. They too will turn out in smaller numbers and some who turn out will switch sides. The same can be said about most other identifiable groups.
I cannot think of one sub-group that Obama might benefit from. Perhaps his support from Hispanics will increase, but I am unsure about that. Whether they do or not, it is difficult to imagine Obama doing anywhere close to what he achieved in 2008. As I have written elsewhere, his biggest advantage of 2008 — people did not know him and could imagine him to be whatever they were looking for — is gone. Now his biggest liability is that too many people know him!
Romney is not the best candidate in this American Idol World of politics. Competency and success seem not to be honored by the electorate. Nevertheless, the bulk of Americans are looking to dump the current albatross and many others need only the slightest excuse to do so. If Romney does not blow it in the debates, I think 2010 will be another huge surprise and embarrassment for Dems and their public relations specialists (otherwise known as the media and most pollsters).
Monty Pelerin / EconomicNoise.com
This post is from two years ago (September 29, 2010). It represents my view of Obama then and what would happen in the mid-term elections (then about 5 weeks away). In the last two years Obama’s record has only become more dismal and his character flaws and ethics have been revealed. Virtually everything he has touched has been a failure (although he claims successes, still believing his words are more important than our eyes or the actual data).Two years later we are again about five weeks away from an election. The media and the pollsters would have you believe that Obama has a lock on being re-elected. The public knew much less about Obama then than they do now. It is incredible to me that pollsters are publishing (with a straight and serious face) the numbers they are. Look for these pollsters to move toward reality as the election nears, not because they will have a clearer vision but because they will eventually be judged in terms of their accuracy during the few weeks preceding the election (especially their last polls). These last polls are their samples for future business. They will change because they value future business more than Obama’s re-election.
There may be a closure effect in the media as well, although it will be less easy to spot. The media publishes qualitative rather than quantitative substance, which somewhat protects them from the clear-cut conclusions that can be drawn against quantitative data. Many media people seem immune to shame and unconcerned about their reputations. The alternative hypothesis of stupidity is also a possibility. Living in their own world, their errors are reinforced by fellow thinkers.
Nevertheless, some members of the media will realize what is coming and abandon their positions rather than go down with the Obama ship. Watch them in the last two weeks preceding the election to see the hedging and perhaps a Road to Damascus conversion or two.
Regardless of how the pollsters and media react, I have no basis to change what was written two years ago. If anything, matters have gotten worse for the Democrats and Obama. Obama’s “magic” is gone. Those who were infatuated by him four years ago are disappointed, disillusioned and possibly angry. Many of them will not vote for him again.
Blacks are disillusioned as their “Great Black Hope” has made their lives more, not less, miserable. They will turn out in smaller numbers this time. College students who came out in droves to vote for the rock star are now jobless, living at home with their parents. They too will turn out in smaller numbers and some who turn out will switch sides. The same can be said about most other identifiable groups.
I cannot think of one sub-group that Obama might benefit from. Perhaps his support from Hispanics will increase, but I am unsure about that. Whether they do or not, it is difficult to imagine Obama doing anywhere close to what he achieved in 2008. As I have written elsewhere, his biggest advantage of 2008 — people did not know him and could imagine him to be whatever they were looking for — is gone. Now his biggest liability is that too many people know him!
Romney is not the best candidate in this American Idol World of politics. Competency and success seem not to be honored by the electorate. Nevertheless, the bulk of Americans are looking to dump the current albatross and many others need only the slightest excuse to do so. If Romney does not blow it in the debates, I think 2010 will be another huge surprise and embarrassment for Dems and their public relations specialists (otherwise known as the media and most pollsters).
Liberal Polls Collapsing For Obama After Debate
To contact us Click HERE
Both national and swing-state polls are beginning to tighten in the presidential race between President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney. It’s a signal that an expected Romney bump is starting to take shape after his consensus win in the first presidential debate on Wednesday.
Polls that track both national and swing state voting have shown nothing but bad news for the president over the last couple of days.
Here’s a sampling of the national polls:
Both national and swing-state polls are beginning to tighten in the presidential race between President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney. It’s a signal that an expected Romney bump is starting to take shape after his consensus win in the first presidential debate on Wednesday.
Polls that track both national and swing state voting have shown nothing but bad news for the president over the last couple of days.
Here’s a sampling of the national polls:
- Gallup: Romney is starting to close in on Obama, trailing by only 3 points in the seven-day rolling average. And that average only reflects two days of surveys post-debate, so the full effect won’t be known until next Wednesday.
- Rasmussen: Rasmussen has had wild swings and tends to be Republican-leaning this election, but Romney holds a 2-point advantage here.
- Reuters/Ipsos: Here, the race has tightened from a 6-point Obama lead pre-debate to only a 2-point lead on Friday. But Saturday didn’t provide any further bounce for Romney in the online survey.
Pew Poll: Romney 49%- Obama 45%
To contact us Click HERE
Mitt Romney no longer trails Barack Obama in the Pew Research Center’s presidential election polling. By about three-to-one, voters say Romney did a better job than Obama in the Oct. 3 debate, and the Republican is now better regarded on most personal dimensions and on most issues than he was in September. Romney is seen as the candidate who has new ideas and is viewed as better able than Obama to improve the jobs situation and reduce the budget deficit.
Fully 66% of registered voters say Romney did the better job in last Wednesday’s debate, compared with just 20% who say Obama did better. A majority (64%) of voters who watched the debate describe it as mostly informative; just 26% say it was mostly confusing.
In turn, Romney has drawn even with Obama in the presidential race among registered voters (46% to 46%) after trailing by nine points (42% to 51%) in September. Among likely voters, Romney holds a slight 49% to 45% edge over Obama. He trailed by eight points among likely voters last month.
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Oct. 4-7 among 1,511 adults, including 1,201 registered voters (1,112 likely voters), finds that 67% of Romney’s backers support him strongly, up from 56% last month. For the first time in the campaign, Romney draws as much strong support as does Obama.
More generally, the poll finds Romney’s supporters far more engaged in the campaign than they were in September. Fully 82% say they have given a lot of thought to the election, up from 73% in September. The new survey finds that Romney supporters hold a 15-point advantage over Obama backers on this key engagement measure. Supporters on both sides were about even in September.
Coming out of the debate, Mitt Romney’s personal image has improved. His favorable rating has hit 50% among registered voters for the first time in Pew Research Center surveys and has risen five points since September. At the same time, Obama’s personal favorability rating has fallen from 55% to 49%.
In the presidential horserace, Romney has made sizable gains over the past month among women voters, white non-Hispanics and those younger than 50. Currently, women are evenly divided (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points (56% to 38%) among women likely voters.
Romney now ties Obama in being regarded as a strong leader and runs virtually even with the president in willingness to work with leaders of the other party. And by a 47% to 40% margin, voters pick Romney as the candidate who has new ideas.
Conversely, Obama continues hold leads as the candidate who connects well with ordinary people and takes consistent positions on issues. And Obama leads by 10 points (49% to 39%) as the candidate who takes more moderate positions on issues.
Romney has gained ground on several of these measures since earlier in the campaign. Most notably, Obama and Romney now run even (44% each) in terms of which candidate is the stronger leader. Obama held a 13-point advantage on this a month ago. And Obama’s 14-point edge as the more honest and truthful candidate has narrowed to just five points.
In June, Obama held a 17-point lead as the candidate voters thought was more willing to work with leaders from the other party. Today, the candidates run about even on this (45% say Obama, 42% Romney).
Similarly, Romney has made progress on the issues. He and Obama now run about even on dealing with health care, Medicare, foreign policy and taxes. Obama led on most of these issues by significant margins in September. Romney also holds a significant 49% to 41% advantage on improving the job situation, despite the fact that most of the interviewing was conducted after the October jobs report, which showed the unemployment rate falling below 8%.
Romney also has once again opened a double-digit advantage as the candidate who can deal with the budget deficit (51% vs. 36%). Romney led by 14 points on the budget deficit in July, but had lost that advantage last month.
Swing voters express varying views of the candidates’ strengths. Some 18% of registered voters are swing voters in the latest survey, meaning they are either undecided, only lean toward one of the candidates, or favor a candidate but say there is still a chance they will change their mind. A month ago, 22% of registered voters fell in this category.
By a 69% to 7% margin, swing voters say Obama is the candidate who connects will with ordinary Americans. Swing voters also tend to rate Obama as the more consistent, honest and moderate candidate, and as a strong leader. Swing voters also favor Obama on the issues of health care, Medicare and foreign policy.
But Romney continues to hold a decided edge over Obama on jobs and the budget deficit. By a 37% to 24% margin, more swing voters say Romney would improve the job situation. Swing voters favor Romney on the deficit by a two-to-one (41% vs. 20%) margin.
president would help the much-discussed middle class. In July, just 41% thought Romney’s policies would help the middle class. This has risen to 49% in the current poll; a comparable percentage of voters (50%) say that Obama’s policies would help the middle class.
Three-quarters of voters say Romney’s policies would benefit the wealthy (75%), basically unchanged from July (74%). Far fewer (31%) see Obama’s policies benefiting the wealthy. Conversely, two-thirds (66%) see Obama’s policies as likely to benefit the poor, compared with 39% who say the same about Romney’s policies.
Romney’s gains on the question of how his policies would affect the middle class have come largely among upper-income voters. Among voters with incomes of $150,000 or more, the percentage saying Romney’s policies would help the middle class rose from 47% in July to
68% now. Among voters in households with incomes between $75,000 and $150,000, the increase was 10 points (from 44% to 54%). Voters in lower-income households have not changed their view of whether Romney would help the middle class, and those with household incomes under $30,000 continue to see Obama as doing more for the middle class.
The edge in favorability ratings that Barack Obama had enjoyed throughout the campaign has now been erased, as voters’ impressions of Romney have continued to improve while Obama’s ratings have returned to levels seen earlier in the summer. Currently, voters are about evenly divided in their overall opinions of both Obama (49% favorable, 48% unfavorable) and Romney (50% favorable, 46% unfavorable).
While shifts are evident across many demographic groups, there has been a notable change among women voters: In September, just 42% viewed Romney favorably, while 60% had positive impressions of Obama. Today, about half view each of the candidates favorably (51% Obama, 48% Romney).
Romney also has gained ground with younger voters. Today, 51% of those under 50 have positive impressions of the GOP candidate, up from 43% in September. Mirroring Romney’s improvement among these younger voters is an erosion in Obama’s ratings among this group: 49% of 18-49-year-old voters now view him favorably, down 10 points from September.
While Romney’s personal image and standing in the horserace have improved markedly, two criticisms of the candidate register widely with voters – especially swing voters.
About six-in-ten voters (62%) agree with the statement that “Romney is promising more than he can deliver,” while 35% disagree. Among swing voters, fully 75% agree, which is closer to the views of certain Obama voters (89% agree) than certain Romney voters (30% agree).
Just more than half of voters (53%) also agree that “It’s hard to know what Romney really stands for.” This includes two thirds (66%) of swing voters, 86% of certain Obama voters and just 16% of certain Romney voters.
Criticism of Obama centers on his ability to improve the economy. Overall, 54% agree that “Obama doesn’t know how to turn the economy around”; 44% disagree with this statement. Romney voters are nearly unanimous in their agreement with this criticism (94%), while only 11% of Obama voters share this view. By a 54% to 39% margin, somewhat more swing voters agree than disagree that Obama doesn’t know how to turn the economy around.
Voters are divided in their reactions to the statement: “Obama thinks government is the solution to every problem” – 46% agree with it, while 51% disagree. The balance of opinion among swing voters mirrors that of voters overall (46% agree, 51% disagree), while Obama voters (78% disagree) and Romney voters (75% agree) hold opposing views.
Asked to describe their greater concern about each of the candidates, more swing voters say they disagree with Obama on issues than distrust him personally (58% vs. 21%). By comparison, roughly as many swing voters say their concern with Romney is his position on issues (44%) as say they don’t trust him personally (36%).
Shifting Horserace
Since September, Mitt Romney has made gains among women and younger voters, and has expanded his advantage among whites without a college degree. In the current poll, women likely voters are evenly divided between the candidates (47% each), while men support Romney by a 51%-43% margin. Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points among women, and trailed among men by only two points.
Similarly, Obama held a solid 56%-39% lead among likely voters under 50 last month. In the current poll, Obama runs even with Romney among voters in this age group (46% Obama, 49% Romney).
Romney picked up seven points among white voters over the past month (from 51% in September to 58% now), while the horse race is unchanged among black voters. Obama’s earlier edge among college graduates (53%-42% in September) is now gone (48% Obama, 47% Romney). And Romney picked up nine points among voters with family incomes of $75,000 or more.
Obama trailed Romney last month among whites who don’t have a college degree, but he has fallen further behind in the current poll. Romney led Obama 53%-40% among this group in September but now holds a much larger 28-point lead (61%-33%).
A substantial majority of voters (69%) say they watched at least some part of last week’s presidential debate and by a more than three-to-one margin (72%-20%), voters who watched say that Romney did a better job than Obama. Romney’s performance exceeded voters’ expectations. Heading into the debate, about half said that Obama (51%) would do a better job, while only 29% said Romney would win. Republican and Democratic voters were about equally likely to have watched the debate.
The vast majority of Republican voters who watched the debate (95%) say that Romney did the better job, and many Democratic voters agree. Democrats are split in their assessment of who did better: 45% say Romney, 44% Obama.
Among independent voters, Romney was the clear winner (78% vs. 14%). And views of swing voters mirror those of independents: 70% say Romney won, 14% Obama.
Nearly two-thirds of voters who watched the debate say it was mostly informative (64%) compared with mostly confusing (26%). Republican voters overwhelmingly found the debate mostly informative (83%); only 11% say the debate was mostly confusing. By contrast, about as many Democratic voters say the debate was confusing (41%) as say it was informative
2012 Election Voter Preference Trends
Track voter preferences for Obama vs. Romney overall and by demographic group among registered voters.Mitt Romney no longer trails Barack Obama in the Pew Research Center’s presidential election polling. By about three-to-one, voters say Romney did a better job than Obama in the Oct. 3 debate, and the Republican is now better regarded on most personal dimensions and on most issues than he was in September. Romney is seen as the candidate who has new ideas and is viewed as better able than Obama to improve the jobs situation and reduce the budget deficit.
Fully 66% of registered voters say Romney did the better job in last Wednesday’s debate, compared with just 20% who say Obama did better. A majority (64%) of voters who watched the debate describe it as mostly informative; just 26% say it was mostly confusing.
In turn, Romney has drawn even with Obama in the presidential race among registered voters (46% to 46%) after trailing by nine points (42% to 51%) in September. Among likely voters, Romney holds a slight 49% to 45% edge over Obama. He trailed by eight points among likely voters last month.
The latest national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, conducted Oct. 4-7 among 1,511 adults, including 1,201 registered voters (1,112 likely voters), finds that 67% of Romney’s backers support him strongly, up from 56% last month. For the first time in the campaign, Romney draws as much strong support as does Obama.
More generally, the poll finds Romney’s supporters far more engaged in the campaign than they were in September. Fully 82% say they have given a lot of thought to the election, up from 73% in September. The new survey finds that Romney supporters hold a 15-point advantage over Obama backers on this key engagement measure. Supporters on both sides were about even in September.Coming out of the debate, Mitt Romney’s personal image has improved. His favorable rating has hit 50% among registered voters for the first time in Pew Research Center surveys and has risen five points since September. At the same time, Obama’s personal favorability rating has fallen from 55% to 49%.
In the presidential horserace, Romney has made sizable gains over the past month among women voters, white non-Hispanics and those younger than 50. Currently, women are evenly divided (47% Obama, 47% Romney). Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points (56% to 38%) among women likely voters.
Views of Candidates’ Traits, Issue Strengths
Romney now ties Obama in being regarded as a strong leader and runs virtually even with the president in willingness to work with leaders of the other party. And by a 47% to 40% margin, voters pick Romney as the candidate who has new ideas.Conversely, Obama continues hold leads as the candidate who connects well with ordinary people and takes consistent positions on issues. And Obama leads by 10 points (49% to 39%) as the candidate who takes more moderate positions on issues.
Romney has gained ground on several of these measures since earlier in the campaign. Most notably, Obama and Romney now run even (44% each) in terms of which candidate is the stronger leader. Obama held a 13-point advantage on this a month ago. And Obama’s 14-point edge as the more honest and truthful candidate has narrowed to just five points.
In June, Obama held a 17-point lead as the candidate voters thought was more willing to work with leaders from the other party. Today, the candidates run about even on this (45% say Obama, 42% Romney).
Similarly, Romney has made progress on the issues. He and Obama now run about even on dealing with health care, Medicare, foreign policy and taxes. Obama led on most of these issues by significant margins in September. Romney also holds a significant 49% to 41% advantage on improving the job situation, despite the fact that most of the interviewing was conducted after the October jobs report, which showed the unemployment rate falling below 8%.Romney also has once again opened a double-digit advantage as the candidate who can deal with the budget deficit (51% vs. 36%). Romney led by 14 points on the budget deficit in July, but had lost that advantage last month.
Swing voters express varying views of the candidates’ strengths. Some 18% of registered voters are swing voters in the latest survey, meaning they are either undecided, only lean toward one of the candidates, or favor a candidate but say there is still a chance they will change their mind. A month ago, 22% of registered voters fell in this category.By a 69% to 7% margin, swing voters say Obama is the candidate who connects will with ordinary Americans. Swing voters also tend to rate Obama as the more consistent, honest and moderate candidate, and as a strong leader. Swing voters also favor Obama on the issues of health care, Medicare and foreign policy.
But Romney continues to hold a decided edge over Obama on jobs and the budget deficit. By a 37% to 24% margin, more swing voters say Romney would improve the job situation. Swing voters favor Romney on the deficit by a two-to-one (41% vs. 20%) margin.
Obama, Romney Now Seen as Equally Likely to Help the Middle Class
A substantial majority of voters continue to say that Mitt Romney’s policies would help the wealthy, but he has made gains since the summer in the perception that his policies aspresident would help the much-discussed middle class. In July, just 41% thought Romney’s policies would help the middle class. This has risen to 49% in the current poll; a comparable percentage of voters (50%) say that Obama’s policies would help the middle class.Three-quarters of voters say Romney’s policies would benefit the wealthy (75%), basically unchanged from July (74%). Far fewer (31%) see Obama’s policies benefiting the wealthy. Conversely, two-thirds (66%) see Obama’s policies as likely to benefit the poor, compared with 39% who say the same about Romney’s policies.
Romney’s gains on the question of how his policies would affect the middle class have come largely among upper-income voters. Among voters with incomes of $150,000 or more, the percentage saying Romney’s policies would help the middle class rose from 47% in July to
68% now. Among voters in households with incomes between $75,000 and $150,000, the increase was 10 points (from 44% to 54%). Voters in lower-income households have not changed their view of whether Romney would help the middle class, and those with household incomes under $30,000 continue to see Obama as doing more for the middle class.Romney’s Image Improves, Obama’s Dips
The edge in favorability ratings that Barack Obama had enjoyed throughout the campaign has now been erased, as voters’ impressions of Romney have continued to improve while Obama’s ratings have returned to levels seen earlier in the summer. Currently, voters are about evenly divided in their overall opinions of both Obama (49% favorable, 48% unfavorable) and Romney (50% favorable, 46% unfavorable).While shifts are evident across many demographic groups, there has been a notable change among women voters: In September, just 42% viewed Romney favorably, while 60% had positive impressions of Obama. Today, about half view each of the candidates favorably (51% Obama, 48% Romney).Romney also has gained ground with younger voters. Today, 51% of those under 50 have positive impressions of the GOP candidate, up from 43% in September. Mirroring Romney’s improvement among these younger voters is an erosion in Obama’s ratings among this group: 49% of 18-49-year-old voters now view him favorably, down 10 points from September.
Views of Candidate Criticisms
While Romney’s personal image and standing in the horserace have improved markedly, two criticisms of the candidate register widely with voters – especially swing voters.About six-in-ten voters (62%) agree with the statement that “Romney is promising more than he can deliver,” while 35% disagree. Among swing voters, fully 75% agree, which is closer to the views of certain Obama voters (89% agree) than certain Romney voters (30% agree).
Just more than half of voters (53%) also agree that “It’s hard to know what Romney really stands for.” This includes two thirds (66%) of swing voters, 86% of certain Obama voters and just 16% of certain Romney voters.
Criticism of Obama centers on his ability to improve the economy. Overall, 54% agree that “Obama doesn’t know how to turn the economy around”; 44% disagree with this statement. Romney voters are nearly unanimous in their agreement with this criticism (94%), while only 11% of Obama voters share this view. By a 54% to 39% margin, somewhat more swing voters agree than disagree that Obama doesn’t know how to turn the economy around.Voters are divided in their reactions to the statement: “Obama thinks government is the solution to every problem” – 46% agree with it, while 51% disagree. The balance of opinion among swing voters mirrors that of voters overall (46% agree, 51% disagree), while Obama voters (78% disagree) and Romney voters (75% agree) hold opposing views.
Asked to describe their greater concern about each of the candidates, more swing voters say they disagree with Obama on issues than distrust him personally (58% vs. 21%). By comparison, roughly as many swing voters say their concern with Romney is his position on issues (44%) as say they don’t trust him personally (36%).Shifting Horserace
Since September, Mitt Romney has made gains among women and younger voters, and has expanded his advantage among whites without a college degree. In the current poll, women likely voters are evenly divided between the candidates (47% each), while men support Romney by a 51%-43% margin. Last month, Obama led Romney by 18 points among women, and trailed among men by only two points.Similarly, Obama held a solid 56%-39% lead among likely voters under 50 last month. In the current poll, Obama runs even with Romney among voters in this age group (46% Obama, 49% Romney).
Romney picked up seven points among white voters over the past month (from 51% in September to 58% now), while the horse race is unchanged among black voters. Obama’s earlier edge among college graduates (53%-42% in September) is now gone (48% Obama, 47% Romney). And Romney picked up nine points among voters with family incomes of $75,000 or more.
Obama trailed Romney last month among whites who don’t have a college degree, but he has fallen further behind in the current poll. Romney led Obama 53%-40% among this group in September but now holds a much larger 28-point lead (61%-33%).
Debate Reactions
A substantial majority of voters (69%) say they watched at least some part of last week’s presidential debate and by a more than three-to-one margin (72%-20%), voters who watched say that Romney did a better job than Obama. Romney’s performance exceeded voters’ expectations. Heading into the debate, about half said that Obama (51%) would do a better job, while only 29% said Romney would win. Republican and Democratic voters were about equally likely to have watched the debate.The vast majority of Republican voters who watched the debate (95%) say that Romney did the better job, and many Democratic voters agree. Democrats are split in their assessment of who did better: 45% say Romney, 44% Obama.Among independent voters, Romney was the clear winner (78% vs. 14%). And views of swing voters mirror those of independents: 70% say Romney won, 14% Obama.
Nearly two-thirds of voters who watched the debate say it was mostly informative (64%) compared with mostly confusing (26%). Republican voters overwhelmingly found the debate mostly informative (83%); only 11% say the debate was mostly confusing. By contrast, about as many Democratic voters say the debate was confusing (41%) as say it was informative
12 Ekim 2012 Cuma
Obama Campaign Workers Helps Undercover Reporter Vote Twice
To contact us Click HERE
New video from Project Veritas shows an Obama for America campaign staffer providing advice and a ballot to an undercover reporter posing as an Obama activist about how to vote twice in the upcoming presidential election. The activist tells Obama for America Houston Director Stephanie Caballero, who is a salaried employee of the Democratic National Committee, she wants to vote in Texas and in Florida.
UPDATE: Watchdog.org has more information about the violation of statutes.
Former DOJ Attorney Christian Adams explains the legality of the situation.
Obama campaign attorney Robert Bauer should be emailing memos to every paid staffer detailing 42 USC 1973i(e) and 42 USC § 1973gg–10(2). The former federal law makes it illegal to vote twice. The latter law prohibits fraudulent voting in a federal election. 18 USC 2 makes it illegal to aid and abet election fraud.The Obama for America will spin this story by throwing Caballero under the bus and will say she is an inexperienced staffer. The problem is, Caballero is the director of the Obama for America Houston office pulling a salary. Caballero isn't an inexperienced staffer or volunteer, not to mention, Caballero's response to the questions about voting twice should have been, "You can't do that and it's illegal." Instead, Caballero giggled and encouraged double voting in Texas and the swing state of Florida.
Encouraging voter participation of marginal legality is nothing new for the Obama campaign. In 2008, they had an elaborate web portal for college students, encouraging some to register to vote where they went to school, discouraging others. The overall goal was to get students attending college in battleground states registered to vote in those states regardless of their actual domicile. If a student from a battleground state went to college in a safe red or blue state, they were encouraged to keep their registration in their home battleground state.
The Obama campaign website in 2008 never told the students to cancel their original voter registration. Nor did it provide guidelines for what constituted bona fide domicile.
Currently, voter watchdog groups like True the Vote are conducting data crunching to determine who may have violated federal election law in 2008 by voting in two states for President. If someone does it again in 2012, it will eventually be caught thanks to the efforts of private parties combing voter rolls.
UPDATE: Watchdog.org has more information about the violation of statutes.
Federally, 42 USC § 1973gg is the strongest as it penalizes attempts to deprive residents of a fair election through false voter registration forms. 42 USC 1973i(c) is your other strong bet. There are more (like the antiquated 18 USC 597), but these 1973gg and 1973i(c) are your strongest federal options.
Remember, policing election integrity occurs first at the state level, then goes up to the federal level. Under Texas law, pay attention to Section 273.001 of the Texas Election Code. It provides that if two or more registered voters present affidavits alleging criminal conduct in connection with the election to the county prosecutor, he shall investigate the matter. If the conduct concerns activities beyond one county, the state attorney general may be properly involved. And Texas imposes duties upon state registrars to ensure that voter registration forms are complete and true -- see Tex. Elec. Code 15.021, 15.112, 15.051(a). Texas election law also permits voting contests to occur when there is evidence of fraud or mistake in connection with the administration of an election (e.g. registering false voters). See Tex. Elec. Code 221.003
'Greece Can Only Solve Its Crisis if It Quits the Euro'
To contact us Click HERE
If you are even slightly interested with the economic crisis in Greece, read this article.
If you are considerate about the nearby future, read this article.
If you need a little push, click here.
One of my favorite points that Sinn makes in his interview:
If I understand interest-bearing loans correctly, don't interest rates encode the risk of default? The idea that a creditor may lend money with trailing interest rates and recollect irregardless of the debtor's ability to pay is irritable. That is the entire notion of risk! Likewise, interest represents the opportunity cost of not investing elsewhere. Why is there an obligation to pay debts that cannot be managed? An entire country turning to austerity mirrors a system of debt bondage, just on a much larger scale. While, yes, the ability to pardon debt too easily could limit growth by turning away investors, a balanced between the creditors and the debtors. I should not be able to go to input debtor into a thesaurus website and see it paired with "delinquent."
Further, what are the negatives to this? What is to become of home mortgages that are held by the Euro? And what of the middle class? They will likely be affected most by the currency shift, and their savings may be exhausted, but what of the austerity period Sinn is predicting? There is also a decent chance that a proportion of the middle class will simply emigrate in search of better opportunities. What shall serve as the backbone of economic revitalization without the pivotal middle class?
If you are considerate about the nearby future, read this article.
If you need a little push, click here.
One of my favorite points that Sinn makes in his interview:
Greece's creditors aren't entitled to have the debt repaid by the international community. Everyone has to earn the standard of living themselves, and those who chose to make money from risk must bear that risk.
If I understand interest-bearing loans correctly, don't interest rates encode the risk of default? The idea that a creditor may lend money with trailing interest rates and recollect irregardless of the debtor's ability to pay is irritable. That is the entire notion of risk! Likewise, interest represents the opportunity cost of not investing elsewhere. Why is there an obligation to pay debts that cannot be managed? An entire country turning to austerity mirrors a system of debt bondage, just on a much larger scale. While, yes, the ability to pardon debt too easily could limit growth by turning away investors, a balanced between the creditors and the debtors. I should not be able to go to input debtor into a thesaurus website and see it paired with "delinquent."
Further, what are the negatives to this? What is to become of home mortgages that are held by the Euro? And what of the middle class? They will likely be affected most by the currency shift, and their savings may be exhausted, but what of the austerity period Sinn is predicting? There is also a decent chance that a proportion of the middle class will simply emigrate in search of better opportunities. What shall serve as the backbone of economic revitalization without the pivotal middle class?
Ginseng Coffee
To contact us Click HERE
Ginseng Coffee
GMB Ginseng Coffee, the first of its kind, is a special blend of fine coffee powder and exclusive ginseng extract formulated by our experienced experts. Ginseng is included in many products, mostly in the form of essences. We add Ginseng extract to our coffee to increase its effectiveness. GMB Ginseng Coffee has an exquisite traditional flavour and a delightful exuberant aroma. It is an invigorating beverage that you will always relish.Ginseng Coffee is a product consisting of a mix of fine coffee powder and exclusive Ginseng extracts. Ginseng Coffee has all the flavour and aroma of traditional coffee. It is a refreshing beverage that is a pleasure to drink at any time of the day.Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Ginseng Coffee
Coffee Websites
To contact us Click HERE
coffee websites
Coffee K was formed in mid 2008 by Guitarist Pierre Kasprzyk and Drummer Jean-François Mouchamps. The idea of the band came about playing Robben Ford style blues, which they suceeded in very much creating that Robben Ford like tone. They have played a portfolio of gigs in Belgium playing rocking covers from Robben Ford, John Mayer, Joe Bonamassa just to name a few.Coffee K recently recruited a new bassist 'Jean-Philippe Dirix' from Belgian singer Marka. They have set out a new aim of goals for this coming year to tour outside of Belgium and to record a full length album full of some new original material.coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
coffee websites
Mail Order Coffee
To contact us Click HERE
Mail Order Coffee
Schultz was immediately captivated by the passion of Star-bucks' founders, Gordon Bowker and Jerry Baldwin, who talked about coffee as if they were discussing the various qualities of fine wine. Fired with enthusiasm, Schultz soon talked them into hiring him as their director of retail operations and marketing. Despite the misgivings of his family, Schultz gave up a respectable job in Manhattan to immerse himself in the arcane business of gourmet coffee. He even found himself attracted to the countercultural aura of Seattle that had given birth to the American coffeehouse. Most importantly he had found a business he could be passionate about, and he threw himself into it wholeheartedly.Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
Mail Order Coffee
11 Ekim 2012 Perşembe
My First post... about McDonalds Jobs
To contact us Click HERE
I've been thinking about writing a blog for years, and I'm now deciding to start one up, keeping a personal journal of sorts, with my thoughts about the world and how I interact with it.
Tomorrow I start my summer job at McDonalds in Taylor, MI. I've worked at two other McDonalds before, one in Dearborn Heights and another one down at school in Daytona Beach, FL. All of my friends give me a hard time about working at McDonalds saying that I need to get the hell out of fast food. Personally, I see nothing wrong with it. I came home from school for the summer near the end of May and put in applications for more than 150 different positions for everything from food service and retail, to warehouse work and janitorial positions. I managed to get one, and only one phone call... from McDonalds. With today's economy, especially in Southeast Michigan, I'm very fortunate to even have a job. Everyone says McDonalds is an easy dead-end job, but they couldn't be more wrong. It's very stressful and very fast paced. I'd be willing to bet than the average Joe wouldn't be able to survive a month working at a busy restaurant. You deal with everything from rude customers, to massive orders for 20 sandwiches or more, to out of control kids and bathroom disasters that would make even the most seasoned janitor cringe. Despite the challenges, with the right crew and management team, the job can be VERY enjoyable. Some of the best people I've met in my life I worked with at McDonalds and there are some customers I will never forget because of the profound impression they made on me.
Yes, I can say I'm looking forward to my new job and a paycheck
Tomorrow I start my summer job at McDonalds in Taylor, MI. I've worked at two other McDonalds before, one in Dearborn Heights and another one down at school in Daytona Beach, FL. All of my friends give me a hard time about working at McDonalds saying that I need to get the hell out of fast food. Personally, I see nothing wrong with it. I came home from school for the summer near the end of May and put in applications for more than 150 different positions for everything from food service and retail, to warehouse work and janitorial positions. I managed to get one, and only one phone call... from McDonalds. With today's economy, especially in Southeast Michigan, I'm very fortunate to even have a job. Everyone says McDonalds is an easy dead-end job, but they couldn't be more wrong. It's very stressful and very fast paced. I'd be willing to bet than the average Joe wouldn't be able to survive a month working at a busy restaurant. You deal with everything from rude customers, to massive orders for 20 sandwiches or more, to out of control kids and bathroom disasters that would make even the most seasoned janitor cringe. Despite the challenges, with the right crew and management team, the job can be VERY enjoyable. Some of the best people I've met in my life I worked with at McDonalds and there are some customers I will never forget because of the profound impression they made on me.
Yes, I can say I'm looking forward to my new job and a paycheck
To moonlight or not to moonlight
To contact us Click HERE
Today while I was literally scrubbing the bathroom floors at the McDonalds where I now work, I got a phone call from a number I have never seen before. Not wanting to break any rules on my first day on the job, I let it ring and go straight to voicemail. After work I checked the message and it was a phone call from Meijer saying they're doing interviews for part time afternoon positions.
As much as I'd like the extra income, I find myself in a bind. Right now McDonalds is only giving me 20 hours a week which is half of what I'd like to be seeing. Today was also my first day so once they see what I'm capable of, I'm sure I'll be getting more hours. If I was to get a second job, I can't even be sure McDonalds would give me a full schedule only working mornings. Plus my girlfriend isn't quite keen on the idea of not being able to see me as much. I sympathize with her too because I'm driving back down to Florida for school in two months and I want to spend as much time with her as I possibly can.
And it's also entirely possible the extra cash from the Meijer job wouldn't even off-set my reduced availability at McDonalds and the gas I'd be burning to drive 15 miles through a construction zone during evening rush hour. I could REALLY use that extra money though, but is it worth time at home with my family and my girlfriend whom I barely get to see as it is?
Decisions decisions...
As much as I'd like the extra income, I find myself in a bind. Right now McDonalds is only giving me 20 hours a week which is half of what I'd like to be seeing. Today was also my first day so once they see what I'm capable of, I'm sure I'll be getting more hours. If I was to get a second job, I can't even be sure McDonalds would give me a full schedule only working mornings. Plus my girlfriend isn't quite keen on the idea of not being able to see me as much. I sympathize with her too because I'm driving back down to Florida for school in two months and I want to spend as much time with her as I possibly can.
And it's also entirely possible the extra cash from the Meijer job wouldn't even off-set my reduced availability at McDonalds and the gas I'd be burning to drive 15 miles through a construction zone during evening rush hour. I could REALLY use that extra money though, but is it worth time at home with my family and my girlfriend whom I barely get to see as it is?
Decisions decisions...
Father's Day
To contact us Click HERE
Sorry about the long time since my last post, I've been very busy with work and my phone decided to take a dump on me so I've been back and forth with Verizon for the last few days getting that taken care of.
Tomorrow is Father's Day, the day we appreciate our overall underrated dads for everything they've done. It's always intrigued me as to why our moms get much more appreciation than our dads. Yes, I know, our moms carried us around as a parasite for 9 months and squeezed us out of a very tight body cavity one day, but our dads taught us a lot throughout our lives as well. For the longest time (I'd say it started to change in the 70s and 80s) dads ruled the house and were looked up to. Nowadays dads are portrayed as the incompetent, simplistic, stupid members of the family that the moms always have to clean up after.
I blame that stigma on the media. Look at all of the popular sitcoms and TV shows of the last 10-15 years. Everybody Loves Raymond, the King of Queens, Malcolm in the Middle, According to Jim, The Simpsons, Family Guy, American Dad, The Cleveland Show... the one thing they all have in common is that the dad/husband is an idiot and his wife is always cleaning up after him. It's not just TV shows either. Most commercials are the same way, whether it's mom "tricking" dad into cooking dinner by buying charcoal for the grill or catching her husband in the act of staying up late playing Xbox with their son.
So for all you dads out there, happy Father's Day and don't hurt yourself trying to open the envelope with the card
Tomorrow is Father's Day, the day we appreciate our overall underrated dads for everything they've done. It's always intrigued me as to why our moms get much more appreciation than our dads. Yes, I know, our moms carried us around as a parasite for 9 months and squeezed us out of a very tight body cavity one day, but our dads taught us a lot throughout our lives as well. For the longest time (I'd say it started to change in the 70s and 80s) dads ruled the house and were looked up to. Nowadays dads are portrayed as the incompetent, simplistic, stupid members of the family that the moms always have to clean up after.
I blame that stigma on the media. Look at all of the popular sitcoms and TV shows of the last 10-15 years. Everybody Loves Raymond, the King of Queens, Malcolm in the Middle, According to Jim, The Simpsons, Family Guy, American Dad, The Cleveland Show... the one thing they all have in common is that the dad/husband is an idiot and his wife is always cleaning up after him. It's not just TV shows either. Most commercials are the same way, whether it's mom "tricking" dad into cooking dinner by buying charcoal for the grill or catching her husband in the act of staying up late playing Xbox with their son.
So for all you dads out there, happy Father's Day and don't hurt yourself trying to open the envelope with the card
Running late for work
To contact us Click HERE
Today I had an interesting customer in the drive-thru. It started yesterday when she ordered two Frappes (we can't call them Frappucinos because Starbucks copy-writes that) and we had to tell her to pull up while we finished making them. It was only going to take about another 30 seconds or so, and most people understand the concept of "parking cars" as we call it. We finished her frappes about 45 seconds after we parked her and when we went outside to give them to her, she was no where to be found! $5 worth of coffee and she didn't even stick around to get them!
Today she came through again, and this time pulled up straight to the window and wanted the coffees she ordered 24 hours prior. Again, we had to park her because two frappes take much more time to make than the two Cokes that were in line behind her. She became VERY indignant and demanded to see my manager. She told my manager that she was running late for work and couldn't wait for them. Then she actually had the gall to say that she's an important executive and we should treat her as such.
Ok, if one minute makes THAT much of a difference, then why are you stopping at all? Either leave the house a couple minutes earlier or don't stop to get some coffees in the drive-thru. And what does being an executive have to do with anything? In our eyes, the guy scrounging up change to get a coffee is just as important as the guy in the BMW ordering a Big Mac meal.
Since when did society get this horrible sense of entitlement?
Today she came through again, and this time pulled up straight to the window and wanted the coffees she ordered 24 hours prior. Again, we had to park her because two frappes take much more time to make than the two Cokes that were in line behind her. She became VERY indignant and demanded to see my manager. She told my manager that she was running late for work and couldn't wait for them. Then she actually had the gall to say that she's an important executive and we should treat her as such.
Ok, if one minute makes THAT much of a difference, then why are you stopping at all? Either leave the house a couple minutes earlier or don't stop to get some coffees in the drive-thru. And what does being an executive have to do with anything? In our eyes, the guy scrounging up change to get a coffee is just as important as the guy in the BMW ordering a Big Mac meal.
Since when did society get this horrible sense of entitlement?
Are today's parents too lazy?
To contact us Click HERE
One of the things I've been noticing over the last few years is that when out in public at Wal Mart, a restaurant, or whatever, most kids seem to be out of control. My parents sometimes remark to my sister and me saying "Oh, if you had done such-and-such when you were that young, we wouldn't take you out" or "we would have punished you on the spot." I'm not talking about simple kid stuff such as constant whining or being full of energy, but things like talking back, running off, and throwing tantrums while parents just ignore it.
At work I see this ALL the time. I've even had some parents tell me that they just give up saying it won't help one bit when the child in question is only 6 or 7 years old! My parents have told me that when they were young, their parents kept them in line by using the belt. My parents rarely used corporal punishment on my sister and me, but we did get grounded and had certain toys and video games taken away when it was called for.
From stories I hear from my friends who are new parents, they don't even do that. Even my girlfriend says the same thing about her younger brother who has no respect for anyone, sneaks out of the house, and smokes weed in the house. What I want to ask is why parents today are so soft? What is it that makes them so lazy and not actually parent and raise their kids?
What do you all think and what are your experiences with this?
At work I see this ALL the time. I've even had some parents tell me that they just give up saying it won't help one bit when the child in question is only 6 or 7 years old! My parents have told me that when they were young, their parents kept them in line by using the belt. My parents rarely used corporal punishment on my sister and me, but we did get grounded and had certain toys and video games taken away when it was called for.
From stories I hear from my friends who are new parents, they don't even do that. Even my girlfriend says the same thing about her younger brother who has no respect for anyone, sneaks out of the house, and smokes weed in the house. What I want to ask is why parents today are so soft? What is it that makes them so lazy and not actually parent and raise their kids?
What do you all think and what are your experiences with this?
10 Ekim 2012 Çarşamba
Coffee Mate
To contact us Click HERE
Coffee Mate
COFFEE-MATE is legally allowed to say it is “trans fat free” because the serving size is so small. But don’t be fooled: COFFEE-MATE contains trans fats!Sodium caseinate: A milk protein that contains no lactose, stabilized to have a longer shelf life. It is a major component of cheese and provides many nutrients and essential amino acids.Mono- and digycerides: Simply put, these are fats. They are emulsifying agents used to extend shelf life, and you will often see them in foods that also contain trans fats. In fact, some nutritionists are calling them “the next trans fats.”Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Coffee Mate
Chicory Coffee
To contact us Click HERE
Our specialty is instant (soluble) spray dried chicory. It is widely used as the 100% natural, healthy, caffeine free, tasty coffee substitute. This product is the excellent source of dietary fibers and inulin. Because of the excellent taste aroma and health benefits this products gains well deserved , growing popularity all over the world. Bio Factor Group also manufactures : agglomerated and granulated chicory. All these products are offered in the wide variety of 100% natural flavors. available for viewing on the company website Bio Factor Group can create and develop a custom chicory blends and flavors for customers having specific requirements regarding the chicory roasting level, other ingredients content, etc. Bio Factor Group also offer liquid chicory extract and dried chicory cubes.
Chicory Coffee
Bio Factor Group based in NJ ,USA is a direct manufacturer of the variety of the chicory products.Our specialty is instant (soluble) spray dried chicory. It is widely used as the 100% natural, healthy, caffeine free, tasty coffee substitute. This product is the excellent source of dietary fibers and inulin. Because of the excellent taste aroma and health benefits this products gains well deserved , growing popularity all over the world. Bio Factor Group also manufactures : agglomerated and granulated chicory. All these products are offered in the wide variety of 100% natural flavors. available for viewing on the company website Bio Factor Group can create and develop a custom chicory blends and flavors for customers having specific requirements regarding the chicory roasting level, other ingredients content, etc. Bio Factor Group also offer liquid chicory extract and dried chicory cubes.
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Chicory Coffee
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)