Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » World Events » United States » Obama claims victory

Obama claims victory

Good bad or indifferent what do my readers think of the Election result in the USA?

Cheers Comrades

Advertisements

73 Comments

  1. deknarf says:

    The American freemarketeering neo-cons have been routed — this time! Now if Australia can just do the same with Phoney Tony and his NO Coalition, 2013 will also be a pretty good year!
    Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty!

  2. Richard Ryan says:

    Just sent over a pallet of tissues to Bolt’s blog—–to wipe the green bile of their lips—gee they don’t Obama on that blog of bile.

  3. Simon says:

    I feel a sense of relief; not from any great love for Barack Obama but because of the unpredictable nature of Mitt Romney and the extreme social conservatism that his nomination and other Republican candidates for Senate and House seats (who also failed to be elected) seemed to represent.

  4. Tel says:

    Just let me say that Obama’s policies and Romney’s policies never were particularly different, but I did expect the result to be much closer, and I’m surprised just how far Obama came out ahead.

    I also expected it would immediately go to court and result in a lot of anger and bitterness but actually Romney gave in quite easily. There are going to be some hard years ahead, and at least the Americans can be sure they made their choice, come what may. The USA is facing bankruptcy and probably will try to inflate away their debt (i.e. print more money), as a result the US dollar will continue to devalue and since the USA is a nett importer of raw materials, that’s going to throttle any recovery on the supply side, leading to very slow growth.

    More interesting, Wall Street put their bets on Romney and lost, could be some backlash there. Can’t say I’ll be crying for the corrupt bastards getting beaten up by a different bunch of corrupt bastards, but we will see if those guys can make a deal. Expect a lot of posturing and accusations as both sides try to get the upper hand.

  5. Simon says:

    Numbskull in point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/06/claire-mccaskill-election-results-2012_n_2049692.html

    The GOP now need to rebuild with quality candidates, that reflect the growing diversity of a modern America with major fiscal problems. Morally righteous leaders, including the forgotten about George W Bush, seem to have no time for such earthly problems like designing an intelligently administrated healthcare system – unless lady-parts are involved.

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    It’s probably better that Americans stuck with ‘the devil they know’ rather than go with someone who hadn’t really outlined what he’d do. Personally I don’t give a shit how far down the toilet the US economy goes and I don’t think it will affect us greatly here in Oz. Those days are over.

  7. kman says:

    Despite that incredible intelligent analytical post from Ray Dixon, readers need to bear in mind that the US dollar is used in most international transactions, so it stands to reason that anything that happens with the US economy will affect international finances in a substantial way.
    The U.S. is China’s largest customer and if Americans cut back on goods from China,China will cut back on minerals from Australia on which of course our economy well and truly depends on.

    Additionally the U.S. is tied into the global economy through interest rates, through trade, through exchange rates, through credit spreads, through bank borrowing costs, and so if the US economy spirals downward, it will certainly impact on a very sick Europe and of course that would also dramatically affect Australia.

    So be careful lefties for what you wish for because as America goes,so does the world, and if America goes in to a recession or even a depression you may very well be out of a job, and there goes your house, car and maybe the wife.
    Think 1929.

  8. Iain Hall says:

    well guys I think that “It was Sandy wot done it” to both get him over the line and to make it quite a convincing win. When it comes down to it Obama looked really decisive and well leader like in the wake of the storm and the destruction he made all of the right noises, further to that he had the Black vote firmly behind him which helped.

    I find it amusing that the minions of the left are seeing this a good portent for Gillard but I think that Nikki Sava puts that notion to bed with her incisive opinion piece in today’s Oz

    After his election in 2008, Obama wrote a beautiful letter to his daughters to explain why he had run for president. He said, in part: “I want us to push the boundaries of discovery so that you’ll live to see new technologies and inventions that improve our lives and make our planet cleaner and safer.

    “And I want us to push our own human boundaries to reach beyond the divides of race and region, gender and religion that keep us from seeing the best in each other.”

    Obama was never going to live up to all the promise and the expectations he created and others heaped on his shoulders. Few presidents or leaders do.

    Despite his shortcomings, he and his family have remained constructive role models for all Americans, so that, as he says: “No matter who you are, no matter what you look like, no matter where you come from, no matter what your last name is, no matter who you love, you can make it here if you try.” It is by no means a new sentiment but, because he is living proof of its veracity, it is a powerful message.

    The Obama story has prompted comparisons with two dispiriting recent domestic political events. The first was Julia Gillard’s speech on sexism and misogyny and the second Warren Mundine’s resignation from the Labor Party.

    She complained about her treatment as first female prime minister and he complained about being neglected. His gripe was legitimate, hers was not.

    Nothing stopped Gillard getting where she always wanted to be, not her sex, not even a prime minister yet to complete his first term. Having got there, the rest was up to her. Mundine’s ambition was thwarted, and while there are those who say he didn’t do enough to realise it, he was no worse and certainly a lot better than some of the hacks Labor has inflicted on the parliament.

    Inside Labor they reckon Mundine just wasn’t smart enough, and not smart enough to embed himself fully in Labor’s right faction, unlike the other political geniuses it has promoted. His elevation would have given Labor moral sway. Americans elected a black president. Twice. Labor can’t find a seat in federal parliament for a single indigenous Australian.

    Gillard had a chance to bring Mundine in as Labor’s first indigenous federal member but chose Bob Carr instead.

    Last Saturday, when The Australian broke the news of Mundine’s resignation, Gillard held a short doorstop to deliver a couple of messages, including her demand that Martin Ferguson drop threatened legal action against Rob Oakeshott, deliberately siding with an independent against her own cabinet minister. Stephen Conroy tells executives he can order them to wear red underpants on their heads if he feels like it and suffers no penalty. Ferguson cannot even secure an apology for being called a swindler.

    Gillard called it quits at the doorstop before anyone asked about Mundine and as she walked off she said with some relief: “We avoided the rain.” Jenny Macklin was dispatched to rebut Mundine.

    Perhaps we should be grateful prime ministerial passion has not been stirred by indigenous affairs, and that she has saved her indignation for the gender wars. Wayne Swan chose to divide the classes, Gillard the sexes.

    In late March she reportedly told a private fundraiser: “I’m good mates with Barack Obama. I tell him, ‘You think it’s tough being African-American? Try being me. Try being an atheist, childless, single woman as prime minister.’ ”

    Obama wrote about the Audacity of Hope. Surely this was the Audacity of Ego. Or the Audacity of Fantasy. It became the template for her speech to parliament last month when she defended her sleazy Speaker, Peter Slipper. She had been itching to give that speech and was waiting for the right moment.

    The public revelations of Slipper’s execrable text messages, which she had known about for months, should have become her Reverend Wright moment. It was her chance to inspire; instead, her speech deserves to stand as an affront to women who have suffered harm from sexism and misogyny.

    No number of website views justifies the hypocrisy of her remarks. A skateboarding dog has had more than 20 million hits. It won’t be a candidate in the next Australian election. Nor will the leaders of France and Denmark whose compliments Gillard lapped up in Laos.

    Gillard’s career has not suffered because of her sex and it is demeaning to pretend it has. In the US more women traditionally vote Democrat because of issues such as abortion and contraception and Mitt Romney’s momentum was not dented by the Democrats’ attempts to run gender against him. A monster hurricane did that.

  9. Brian says:

    well guys I think that “It was Sandy wot done it”…. further to that he had the Black vote firmly behind him which helped.

    A fairly silly thing to say, Iain. Most blacks vote Democrat anyway so it’s not as if Obama’s colour has been a compelling factor. Anyway, why would the average working class African American feel compelled to vote for a wealthy Mormon elitist?

    At the end of the day, the incumbent president always has a huge advantage. People talk tough about sitting presidents but history shows that they aren’t keen on voting them out. And although Obama has cocked up some of his policies, he did dispense with bin Laden, something Bush was incapable of doing.

  10. Brian says:

    So be careful lefties for what you wish for because as America goes,so does the world, and if America goes in to a recession or even a depression you may very well be out of a job, and there goes your house, car and maybe the wife. Think 1929.

    1929? That’ll be the stockmarket crash and global depression started almost entirely by (wait for it) Americans.

  11. Ray Dixon says:

    readers need to bear in mind that the US dollar is used in most international transactions, so it stands to reason that anything that happens with the US economy will affect international finances in a substantial way.

    That’s just stupid.

  12. Iain Hall says:

    Brian

    A fairly silly thing to say, Iain. Most blacks vote Democrat anyway so it’s not as if Obama’s colour has been a compelling factor. Anyway, why would the average working class African American feel compelled to vote for a wealthy Mormon elitist?

    I know that but my point is that the advent of “Sandy” made Obama look the part and to ooze a sense of competency, further its his ability to cut through black Hispanic and Gay apathy and to get people to the polling booths that has made the difference far more that the scenario that you suggest, in my opinion anyway.

  13. Brian says:

    his ability to cut through black Hispanic and Gay apathy and to get people to the polling booths that has made the difference far more that the scenario that you suggest, in my opinion anyway.

    Obama doesn’t have any superpowers or even any significant policies that win him votes from Latinos or homosexuals. It’s more that these minorities were petrified by some of the wild anti-immigration, anti-gay and pro-life nonsense coming from the other side, particularly the Tea Party. Do you think Romney’s chances benefited from a high profile Republican saying that it was God’s will if a woman was raped and impregnated? That kind of garbage will lose you votes in a hurry.

    Despite what you reckon, the experts all agree that incumbency gives you a big head start. Only a handful of presidents have been tossed out of office after one term, and most of those were crap, e.g. Carter, Ford, Hoover. Romney had to beat Obama in the campaign but his campaign was six months of mushy platitudes, few policies and flip flopping over those he did discuss.

  14. Iain Hall says:

    Brian

    Obama doesn’t have any superpowers or even any significant policies that win him votes from Latinos or homosexuals. It’s more that these minorities were petrified by some of the wild anti-immigration, anti-gay and pro-life nonsense coming from the other side, particularly the Tea Party. Do you think Romney’s chances benefited from a high profile Republican saying that it was God’s will if a woman was raped and impregnated? That kind of garbage will lose you votes in a hurry.

    I’m not suggesting superpowers at all however he did inspire a big turnout from the aforementioned demographics and that means a lot when voting is voluntary and on a work day. As for the abortion issue I don’t that in we in a far more secular society get the passion that many in the USA feel about it and how much passion that they have for the sanctity of the unborn lives that “progressives” are so keen to dismiss or ignore. Having a strong position on abortion, either for or against is probably a zero sum game overall because while the progressives may not vote for an anti abortion candidate a conservative won’t vote for a pro abortion either.

  15. kman says:

    “readers need to bear in mind that the US dollar is used in most international transactions, so it stands to reason that anything that happens with the US economy will affect international finances in a substantial way.

    That’s just stupid.”

    Really ? Why is it stupid? It’s pretty obvious that most countries in the world have large quantities of USD so if anything happens with the US economy and the dollar plunges, those stockpiles of dollars held by governments will; obviously take a hit., thereby obviously affecting international finances. So go ahead genius and tell us why it is stupid.

  16. kman says:

    As for the 29 crash in America Yes that crash affected the entire world.-Hello why do you think I pointed it out?
    Ian you really gotta get some smarter leftards on this blog!

  17. Richard Ryan says:

    “America the worse country to be poor” snigger-snigger. Shalom.

  18. Iain Hall says:

    Ian you really gotta get some smarter leftards on this blog!

    Oh I’m sure that they are smart enough Kman what they suffer from is wrong headed thinking and no understanding of history 😉

  19. Iain Hall says:

    Richard that is nonsense, try being poor in Siberia, or any of the failed states of Africa far worse than being poor in the USA

  20. paulwello says:

    Oh I’m sure that they are smart enough Kman what they suffer from is wrong headed thinking and no understanding of history 😆 😆 😆 😆

  21. paulwello says:

    Iain,

    they suffer from is wrong headed thinking and no understanding of history

    Just because the left has a different thinking from the right wing trolls, does not make us wrong, we also understand history, different from the right wing as well, Also, I suppose you think Donald Trump was correct in saying that america was robbed when Obama won the election and it is an illegitimate government, just like TA keeps saying about this elected government in Australia.

  22. Richard Ryan says:

    AND what about that little “bonsai” Howard who poured bile on Obama, when he stood for leader the first time—more or less saying the terrorist would be happy if he won, karma will take care of Johnny in due time, sooner then later I hope.

  23. kman says:

    So let’s define “poor” in America….The following are facts about persons defined as “poor” by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:
    Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

    Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

    Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

    The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

    Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.

    Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

    Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

    Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.

    The Census Bureau defines an individual as poor if his or her family income falls below certain specified income thresholds. These thresholds vary by family size. In 2006, a family of four was deemed poor if its annual income fell below $20,615; a family of three was deemed poor if annual income was below $16,079. There are a number of problems with the Census Bureau’s poverty figures: Census undercounts income, ignores assets accumulated in prior years, and disregards non-cash welfare such as food stamps and public housing in its official count of income. However, the most important problem with Census figures is that, even if a family’s income falls below the official poverty thresholds, the family’s actual living conditions are likely to be far higher than the image most Americans have in mind when they hear the word “poverty.”

    And bear in mind that America takes in over a million people ,mostly from the third word,every single year, and there are over 11 million illegals and tens of millions of illegals who were given amnesty that make up the figures of “poor” Americans.

    So Richard Ryan, go snigger-snigger yourself you twisted idiot!

  24. Iain Hall says:

    Paul

    Just because the left has a different thinking from the right wing trolls, does not make us wrong,

    In your case it does

    we also understand history, different from the right wing as well,

    You clearly don’t understand history very well at all Paul but then again you go into it with such a blinkered and narrow viewpoint that makes your personal shortcomings in historical understanding totally explicable.

    Also, I suppose you think Donald Trump was correct in saying that america was robbed when Obama won the election and it is an illegitimate government,

    I have heard of his rant, however I have no desire to read or here it because quite simply I don’t agree with or endorse the sentiment.

    just like TA keeps saying about this elected government in Australia.

    you are clearly deluded by your leftist coloured spectacles, on two counts firstly the thrust of Abbott’s on going criticism of Gillard’s government has never been about its legitimacy, she holds a majority on the floor of the house of reps so she governs, rather its been about her competence and lack of personal integrity both are sadly lacking in Labor ranks and both qualities make the removal of the Gillard government at the next election most likely.

  25. kman says:

    And re the “poor” in America. They also pay a fraction of what we and the “poor” in the rest of the world pay for absolutely everything – from autos to food and everything in between.That’s why the world buys on-line in the US now and just another reason the “poor” from all around the world want to get to America.

    Leftards please note- the “poor” who are scaling the barbed wire fences or sneaking across boarders where they could be shot at any second want to escape to America. from the Communist hell where they have be existing. You don’t hear of too many “poor” from America trying to get in to say, Cuba or North Korea.

  26. Ray Dixon says:

    Why is it stupid? It’s pretty obvious that most countries in the world have large quantities of USD so if anything happens with the US economy and the dollar plunges, those stockpiles of dollars held by governments will; obviously take a hit., thereby obviously affecting international finances. So go ahead genius and tell us why it is stupid.

    No need to – you just did. Hint: Foreign currencies don’t crash so fast that those holding any can’t bail out and cut their losses. But you’d know that, being the Forex expert you are, KKKman.

  27. Brian says:

    Wonders may never cease but I actually agree with “kman”. The United States is not the worst nation in which to be poor, it is probably one of the best. Poverty in the US is more widespread than it should be. But even so it is measured in different relative terms than poverty in Asia, Africa or South America. And the US does have a functioning welfare system, even if it is not as effective as those in the UK or Australia.

    Iain, most history is a matter of perspective. Telling people they are wrong about history is about as logical as telling people they support the wrong football team. And probably just as pointless.

  28. Iain Hall says:

    No need to – you just did. Hint: Foreign currencies don’t crash so fast that those holding any can’t bail out and cut their losses

    Ray try telling the people of Iran that!

    Their currency is about as valuable as used toilet paper these days…

  29. Iain Hall says:

    Brian

    Iain, most history is a matter of perspective. Telling people they are wrong about history is about as logical as telling people they support the wrong football team. And probably just as pointless.

    Well being a historian you would say that! However like a lot of things if you have jaundiced perspective that weights your consideration of history too much towards any ideology (as Paul or Richard does) then your opinions about history would at the very least be very flawed.

  30. paulwello says:

    You clearly don’t understand history very well at all Paul but then again you go into it with such a blinkered and narrow viewpoint that makes your personal shortcomings in historical understanding totally explicable.

    lets hear your version of history then Iain, or are you just going to have another f####ng whine again about how you lost the election.

  31. Iain Hall says:

    Well I have no horse in the US election race Paul and I seldom comment on US politics in general so how could I have any kind of “whine again about how you lost the election.”

  32. paulwello says:

    You are pathetic Iain, you know what I was talking about so answer the question.

  33. Iain Hall says:

    Paul you asked no specific question so how can I answer something unasked?

    You should know by now that I apply a forensic methodology in my response to you. So don’t blame me when I act on what you say rather than upon the foetid machinations of your implied meanings.

  34. paulwello says:

    Your view on history on why TA did not form government.

  35. Iain Hall says:

    that is still not a question Paul 😉

  36. paulwello says:

    avoiding the question Iain, and it is a question. and also would like to know why a TA government would be better for Australia. or are you afraid people will not like your view.

  37. Iain Hall says:

    Paul, the convention is that for a sentence to function as a question it requires one of these “?” at it’s end rather than one of these “.”. Really I should not have to explain the simple rules of English prose to someone like you who is closer to their school years than I am 🙄

  38. paulwello says:

    I knew you would say that, not answering the question, don’t answer it then Iain, you are truly remarkable at not answering questions.

    So Iain you know how old I am, not likely. ok now answer the question, Why would a TA government be better for Australia??

  39. Iain Hall says:

    Paul

    I knew you would say that, not answering the question, don’t answer it then Iain, you are truly remarkable at not answering questions.

    If you knew that I would require correctly formulated and grammatically correct question, then your failure to do so is a serious shortcoming in your debating “style” and something that you should address if you want to be an effective communicator. 😀

    So Iain you know how old I am, not likely.

    But I never made any claim about knowing how old you are but I am rather certain that you are younger than me.

    ok now answer the question, Why would a TA government be better for Australia??

    Any government not led by a member of the ALP is bound to be more competent and our country would of course do better with a competent administration.

    There you go that is my answer, now I expect you to insist that because You don’t agree with my opinion that I have not actually answered your question at all. 🙄

  40. paulwello says:

    Now that you have stated

    Any government not led by a member of the ALP is bound to be more competent and our country would of course do better with a competent administration.

    There you go that is my answer, now I expect you to insist that because You don’t agree with my opinion that I have not actually answered your question at all.

    why would a TA lead government be more competent than an ALP government?

  41. Iain Hall says:

    Paul

    why would a TA lead government be more competent than an ALP government?

    There are many reasons not the least of which is the fact that an Abbott government would not be making promises that they can’t deliver. Where Pray tell is Swan’s surplus? The latest ALP promise to be abandoned is the internet filter (not that I endorsed it) Then there is the Asylum seekers that keep fronting up despite the ALP make some of the right noises, the empty rhetoric of the Asian century white paper, the list of ALP failure is very long indeed, so long in fact that it makes your question rather moot.

  42. paulwello says:

    Where Pray tell is Swan’s surplus? The latest ALP promise to be abandoned is the internet filter (not that I endorsed it) Then there is the Asylum seekers that keep fronting up despite the ALP make some of the right noises, the empty rhetoric of the Asian century white paper, the list of ALP failure is very long indeed, so long in fact that it makes your question rather moot.

    Iain I know what your view is of the Labor government, I want your view of why a TA lead government would be more competent than an ALP government?

  43. paulwello says:

    Abbott government would not be making promises that they can’t deliver.

    You obviously know what the LNP policies are, so what are they IAIN?

  44. paulwello says:

    the list of ALP failure is very long indeed, so long in fact that it makes your question rather moot.

    If fact Iain, it makes my question rather more important, as the country needs a direction from an Abbott lead coalition as to where it is going to take this country, if it wants to win the next election

  45. Iain Hall says:

    I suspect that you don’t understand what a “moot point” is Paul, which is why you ask such a stupid question. When the country is being led by a bunch of clowns even a moth-eaten lion tamer is a better choice than the continuation of a big shoes administration. Fortunately for the country we have a better choice than even that ragged lion tamer, we have a very talented opposition who are ready willing and able to give this country good governance and sound financial management.

  46. paulwello says:

    The thing is Iain, I do know what a moot point is, so Iain, seeing that you have not answered the question asked, I am now of the view that you have given here, that a LNP government will not be elected at the election for the very same reasons.

  47. paulwello says:

    When the country is being led by a bunch of clowns even a moth-eaten lion tamer is a better choice than the continuation of a big shoes administration. Fortunately for the country we have a better choice than even that ragged lion tamer

    Please elaborate on this Iain, If you think an Abbott lead coalition is better, explain then why it would be better.

  48. Iain Hall says:

    Its self evident Paul, and the only reason that you can’t see it is that you are either too stupid or too inculcated with socialist dogma.

  49. paulwello says:

    Iain, it is a simple question to which you have not answered, you continuing not to answer means that you are afraid of what an Abbott lead coalition will do to this country, now what is it Iain, will the coalition promises be fruitful for them to gain government at the next election.

  50. Iain Hall says:

    Paul

    I have answered you question, sadly you just don’t like my answer so you want to insist that I have not given you any answer at all. maybe you need to get some help with your comprehension skills because its clear that they are woefully deficient.

  51. kman says:

    Good example re Iran Ian.

    Incidentally Red Boy -a currency crash is defined as a large change of the nominal exchange rate that is also a substantial increase in the rate of change of nominal depreciation.

    .Your assertion ” Foreign currencies don’t crash so fast that those holding any can’t bail out and cut their losses. there is plenty of time” t
    That so?
    Now every nation on the planet would know if the USD is in trouble. China and Japan have just over $1.1 trillion each and if either one decided to unload their USD overnight, which country do the other nations holding three trillion in USD unload their bucks to?

    And Paul time to let it go sport it’s becoming really boring.

  52. paulwello says:

    Iain, the answers that you have given,

    When the country is being led by a bunch of clowns even a moth-eaten lion tamer is a better choice than the continuation of a big shoes administration.

    and this

    Where Pray tell is Swan’s surplus? The latest ALP promise to be abandoned is the internet filter (not that I endorsed it) Then there is the Asylum seekers that keep fronting up despite the ALP make some of the right noises, the empty rhetoric of the Asian century white paper, the list of ALP failure is very long indeed

    You have not given an answer, they are just criticism of the Labor government, so it seems you do not have an answer, only criticism, which is what the coalition gives when answering questions put to them on why they should be the next government.

  53. paulwello says:

    maybe you need to get some help with your comprehension skills because its clear that they are woefully deficient.

    Iain, that is just a distraction on your behalf because you do not have an answer, that is the same as getting some to write a 2000 word post, you do not have an answer.

    As I said Iain, it is a simple question that requires a simple answer, that in which you cannot do!!

  54. Richard Ryan says:

    WHAT does Tony Abbott know about pedophiles in the Catholic Church? Not all Catholics are pedophiles but a some Catholic priests are pedophiles, “suffer the little children to come” and suffer they did. When the law has failed them, these innocent children, and the state no longer cares, it is time to take the law into your own hands.

  55. Richard Ryan says:

    AS Keating once said: Abbott as leader of this country, “God help US,” Abbott would be up there with Bush, now that was a clown, was it not?

  56. Ray Dixon says:

    KKKman, if you’re going to quote me, don’t add words to my quote. This is what I said:

    “Foreign currencies don’t crash so fast that those holding any can’t bail out and cut their losses.”

    The one of these “.” is called a FULL STOP. It’s at the end of my sentence and the end of my quote. I did not add “there is plenty of time” – you did.

  57. paulwello says:

    You said it Richard, Bush was a clown.

  58. Iain Hall says:

    Paul
    You asked for AN answer, but like a lot of blinkered thinkers you seem to think that only an answer to your liking is any kind of answer:

    Your question was , and I quote it verbatim:

    Why would a TA (Tony Abbott) government be better for Australia??

    Now there are just two choices with regard to who will govern Australia, either Labor or the Coalition so when arguing about who would be better there are two ways to do that, one is to sing the praises of either option and the other way is to point out the inadequacies of one of the choices. I chose to answer your question with the later methodology and frankly I think that I have made a more than adequate case that Labor have been woeful in government so ANY alternative has to be an improvement.

  59. paulwello says:

    You asked for AN answer, but like a lot of blinkered thinkers you seem to think that only an answer to your liking is any kind of answer:

    Yes Iain, I asked for an answer, you have only given criticism of the Labor party in Government.

    You have not answered the question Iain, just by saying this Iain,

    I think that I have made a more than adequate case that Labor have been woeful in government so ANY alternative has to be an improvement.

    , means Iain that you are void of any real answers, which also means you cannot answer the simple question.

    Now Iain I will type this real slow for you, just so you can understand the question, “Why would a TA (Tony Abbott) government be better for Australia??”

  60. Iain Hall says:

    Paul
    I have given you enough answers to that oft repeated question so now its my turn to ask you one
    Why you think that another term of Labor in power would be better for the country than sending Labor into the political wilderness for a generation?

  61. paulwello says:

    I have given you enough answers to that oft repeated question so now its my turn to ask you one

    You still have not answered the question on offer, now answer the question, Why would a TA (Tony Abbott) government be better for Australia??.

    It is a simple question, why do you keep changing the subject.

  62. paulwello says:

    Iain you said this

    There are many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that an Abbott government would not be making promises that they can’t deliver.

    That seems to be the only answer you have given, everything else is just criticism of the current government.

    Now that you have said there are many reasons, what are they Iain.

  63. paulwello says:

    Why you think that another term of Labor in power would be better for the country than sending Labor into the political wilderness for a generation?

    Who said they are going to be in the political wilderness, oh that’s right you did, looked at the polls lately IAIN.

  64. Iain Hall says:

    that does not answer my question Paul, so try again

  65. paulwello says:

    Why you think that another term of Labor in power would be better for the country than sending Labor into the political wilderness for a generation?

    Considering the coalition have only released three policies that have been costed and they are going to cost the Australian taxpayer $17.6 billion, so I suppose anything would be better then a LNP government.

  66. paulwello says:

    that does not answer my question Paul, so try again

    nor mine Iain, you can do better. OH that’s right you cannot do any better.

  67. Iain Hall says:

    No Paul I don’t need to do any better, having completed the task, you on the other hand have not even tried

  68. paulwello says:

    No Paul I don’t need to do any better, having completed the task, you on the other hand have not even tried

    What task Iain, on answering the question, I would give you a minus Z.

    Well Iain answering you silly question, I have answered it in the same way that you answer questions, giving criticism.

  69. Iain Hall says:

    well from now on you will have to convince me that your drivel is worth publishing, and boring me won’t do it.

  70. Richard Ryan says:

    Iain, what about a blog on the Catholic Church—-to me it looks like it has Terminal Cancer. You have given the Muslims a good run—now it’s the Catholics turn.

  71. kman says:

    KKKman, if you’re going to quote me, don’t add words to my quote. This is what I said:
    “Foreign currencies don’t crash so fast that those holding any can’t bail out and cut their losses.”

    The “there is plenty of time” is my take of what you said – and you implied clearly that “there is plenty of time” that those holding foreign currency can bail out and cut their losses, and there is absolutely no other way to interpret this. And you were of course wrong as usual.

    Incidentally, Redchard, there are treatments for stuttering-maybe you should look in to them !

    Boring, I am outa here.

  72. Craig says:

    Demographics is destiny, plain and simple.

    What I find interesting only 49% of the voting adult population actually voted, American citizens apathy towards those who rule them is really telling.

    The spread of demographics in the US is starting to resemble the pre civil war, in a modern context.

    We really do live in interesting times.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: