GDP shows loss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BuddyJ

Are you surprised?

---

In a word NO

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starjack

Not a month later

---

What then a month prior????
Why dont you check out when these reports typically come out. If its out of the ordinary fill us in

The keynesian solution - - - after total failure - try, try again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starjack

In a word NO

---

And the lying so and so's weren't going to increase taxes---have you looked at your payroll check lately?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Goose

The keynesian solution - - - after total failure - try, try again.

---

The Keynesian Solution is to throw more money at the problem.

There are some thoughts in marketing that never change. The hardest task any company is faced with is in changing the perceptions by the public of their brand. A brand is a brand, perception is reality to the consumer/voter. Once a brand falls into disfavor, bad image etc., it is almost impossible to change that image no matter how much money a company is willing to reinvest into that brand. No amount of talk will change that image. Budweiser use to be the #1 selling beer. Unfiltered Lucky Strikes were the top selling smokes. The list is very long of brands that were once popular that today are no longer anywhere near the top in market share. The Republican Party is one such broken brand. There is nothing they can say or do that will ever get them back into the White House.

Mainly because the Repub Party has little appeal with the under 40 year olds or anyone that isn't white. Even white females voted Obama, 56% to 44% in ther last election.

So, someone tell me how they will ever return to prominence with their refusal to enter the 21st Century?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franco

The Keynesian Solution is to throw more money at the problem.

There are some thoughts in marketing that never change. The hardest task any company is faced with is in changing the perceptions by the public of their brand. A brand is a brand, perception is reality to the consumer/voter. Once a brand falls into disfavor, bad image etc., it is almost impossible to change that image no matter how much money a company is willing to reinvest into that brand. No amount of talk will change that image. Budweiser use to be the #1 selling beer. Unfiltered Lucky Strikes were the top selling smokes. The list is very long of brands that were once popular that today are no longer anywhere near the top in market share. The Republican Party is one such broken brand. There is nothing they can say or do that will ever get them back into the White House.

Mainly because the Repub Party has little appeal with the under 40 year olds or anyone that isn't white. Even white females voted Obama, 56% to 44% in ther last election.

So, someone tell me how they will ever return to prominence with their refusal to enter the 21st Century?

---

You failed to mention that some brands were not popular then, still aren't and never will be.:cool:

Did any of you actually look at the numbers? Do you even have the slightest idea what parts of the economy grew and which contracted?

Sure doesn't seem like it judging from the comments here.

GOOD DISCUSSION!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by road kill

$5 trillion in stimulus
Worst perfomance since '09
Biggest dip in 3 years
Democrats blame Republicans
60% approval rating for Obama

"at this point, does it really matter?"

---

It does matter & that's why I continue to support those think tanks that have a coherent & consistent message. Today is check writing day :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smillerdvm

Even though RK has blocked me, I will use his quote to make a point to others who havent blocked me

He correctly states that "Dems blame Reps"
he fails to mention that Reps blame Dems.
Both of those statements are correct

What is also correct is that the problem is the responsibility of the Dems and the Repubs.
He goes on to state "at this point does it really matter?"

My answer to that question is "YES" At this point it matters more than ever
We are in a crisis. Both the Dems and Reps have had periods of control of both houses of Congress and the White House during the formation of this crisis. In those periods the problem just got worse. To a rational mind that would seem to clearly show that the Dems and Reps have both proven they are the problem and are incapable of solving it; even when they control Congress and the White House.

Yet we keep blindly voting for either the Dems or the Reps to the exclusion of all other parties.
We the sheeple keep voting the same two parties into power; those two parties have caused the problem and have proven they cant & wont solve the problem.

When Franco and others point out the folly of this practice the response from the sheeple is to point fingers at the other party. After ridiculing Franco, All or most will begrudgingly admit that the two party system has failed us. They will also admit that they like much of the platform of other parties; however those parties are too weak to have any effect.


However politics aint football. In Politics ALL of the strength still comes from we the sheeple; with our votes.
If we the sheeple deny our votes {and $}to the failed Dems & Reps then instantaneously they become the skinny frail ineffective retiree who can no longer have any impact on the result of what is for the USA the ultimate SUPER BOWL.

Need I remind the Dem & Rep denizens of this echo chamber of the definition of insanity???

Please dont anyone quote this post, so as not to expose the delicate RK to anymore of my MEANNESS :)

---

There are 545 people with the ability to do something - if they don't do it we do have a choice. But ask yourself, you make a good income & are probably intelligent enough to start on the road to straightening things out. Would you give up the life you lead to lead the life they do?

During the periods of control & especially in the R column, the caucuses are not one smooth flowing group.

While you point out Franco as a leading example of someone who has it right, who's going to lead his group? - for the Paul's it is a big fund raising jackpot that they will exploit to it's fullest. When Goldwater is brought up Franco belittles his accomplishments when he's the last politician to have enough charisma to excite the base in any tangible volume. At the least when Perot ran under United We Stand he excited enough folks that we only had one term of GHWB, but we got the Clinton's. If there is going to be a viable 3rd party there must be a charismatic leader.

As for vote denial, it's long been a case of voting against rather than voting for - until there are credible candidates someone is always going to vote what's good for them, which may not be good for us :confused:.

But I'll say this, I've posted twice about uncommon items, AlGore's windfall from AAPL & Chelsea's cushy new directors job (just the tip of the iceberg) with little comment from members of this forum. Until some can comprehend the underlying thought behind those actions, How do you think we can get a credible 3rd party started? Sheeple or No :rolleyes:.

Gee, I wonder? Could a contraction in GDP be due to a contraction in military spending? Is that a good or bad thing? JD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Marvin S

It does matter & that's why I continue to support those think tanks that have a coherent & consistent message. Today is check writing day :).



There are 545 people with the ability to do something - if they don't do it we do have a choice. But ask yourself, you make a good income & are probably intelligent enough to start on the road to straightening things out. Would you give up the life you lead to lead the life they do?

During the periods of control & especially in the R column, the caucuses are not one smooth flowing group.

While you point out Franco as a leading example of someone who has it right, who's going to lead his group? - for the Paul's it is a big fund raising jackpot that they will exploit to it's fullest. When Goldwater is brought up Franco belittles his accomplishments when he's the last politician to have enough charisma to excite the base in any tangible volume. At the least when Perot ran under United We Stand he excited enough folks that we only had one term of GHWB, but we got the Clinton's. If there is going to be a viable 3rd party there must be a charismatic leader.

As for vote denial, it's long been a case of voting against rather than voting for - until there are credible candidates someone is always going to vote what's good for them, which may not be good for us :confused:.

But I'll say this, I've posted twice about uncommon items, AlGore's windfall from AAPL & Chelsea's cushy new directors job (just the tip of the iceberg) with little comment from members of this forum. Until some can comprehend the underlying thought behind those actions, How do you think we can get a credible 3rd party started? Sheeple or No :rolleyes:.

---

First Marv, it's Pauls not Paul's. The 's is used as a possessive.

Second, I have never belittled Goldwater. I have given him many props here on POTUS. Though an early Libertarian leaning Repub, his legacy is mostly lost in today's Libertarian Party. The cheese, so-to-speak, has been moved.

Third, Dr Ron Paul has retired from the House. He is on a speaking engagement tour raising money for the Liberty Pack which he donates 100% of his speaking fees to and not lining his pocket. Just as he refused to accept Medicare and Medicaid payments from the government for the people he treated in his medical practice. It is called, integrity and you wouldn't know an honest man if you met one! To refer to him as dishonest just demonstrates how corrupt you are Marv.

Lastly, we have that charismatic leader. His name is Sen. Rand Paul and if you haven't been paying attention, he is the most active member in the Senate. He's a reformer that has authored more bills this session than any other Senator. Only to have them rejected by the status quo which you support. And, he traveled to Israel with a Libertarian group this year meeting with Israeli leaders including one of his biggest supporters, Ben Netanyahu. Explaining to him why he would cut back military aide to him as well as the radical Islamic countries that we pour tax dollars into. Before leaving, he visited the main Temple and read the Torah in Hebrew. Impressive to say the least for a non-Jew. Rand makes the rest of the Repubs look like sheep.