2016

• sleeper

  

  isadore;1315641 wrote:gosh a ruddies, kerry was a loser, gore had the most people voting for him. he got cheated.

  Good to know you voted for Bush.
• password

  

  Mrs. Obama will be running in 2016, take it to the bank.
• WebFire

  isadore;1315630 wrote:gosh a ruddies we smart people knew our candidate, our first African American President, was going to win. The less smart, a euphemism for stupid, people thought their candidate Mitt Romney would win, you were wrong. Gosh it was a stupid decision to support him, a loser.

  Ever here the quote "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"?
• Sonofanump

  This thread is worthless, no election will be had in 2016 under the socialist dictatorship of the current regime. If an election does take place, it will be just a walk through after term limits are abolished.
• rmolin73

  

  Sonofanump;1315729 wrote:This thread is worthless, no election will be had in 2016 under the socialist dictatorship of the current regime. If an election does take place, it will be just a walk through after term limits are abolished.

  Hahahaha hilarious!
• isadore

  WebFire;1315720 wrote:Ever here the quote "Better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt"?

  but gosh a ruddies you keep talking, wow. you know what you inflict your views on our nation. of course they have been rejected by the American people. but reading your views does help drive people to Barack Obama.
• WebFire

  isadore;1315739 wrote:but gosh a ruddies you keep talking, wow. you know what you inflict your views on our nation. of course they have been rejected by the American people. but reading your views does help drive people to Barack Obama.

  Gullible much?
• isadore

  WebFire;1315744 wrote:Gullible much?

  gullible is believing that the Republican party actually cares about average working people in this country.
• justincredible

  

  isadore;1315751 wrote:gullible is believing that the Democratic party actually cares about average working people in this country.

  Indeed.
• isadore

  justincredible;1315753 wrote:Indeed.

  obviously you have spent to much time in front of a computer screen so that you are unable to recognize compassion, caring and tolerance for those Americans who do not happen to be in the 1%. The Democratic party, the party of the people as this election has shown.
• rmolin73

  

  Maybe if the party of "no" will show up and vote in 2016 they may have a chance. Most of them stayed home in 2012 becoming the party of "no show".
• WebFire

  isadore;1315751 wrote:gullible is believing that the Republican party actually cares about average working people in this country.

  Yes Obama cares so much that the average workers health insurance will rise to unprecedented cost. Thanks!
• isadore

  WebFire;1315764 wrote:Yes Obama cares so much that the average workers health insurance will rise to unprecedented cost. Thanks!

  gosh a ruddies what he has done is make sure more Americans will have medical coverage, something Republicans are obviously indifferent to.
• justincredible

  

  isadore;1315768 wrote:gosh a ruddies what he has done is make sure more Americans will have medical coverage, something Republicans are obviously indifferent to.

  Perhaps if the govt got the fuck out of the health care industry it would be affordable for everyone.
• isadore

  justincredible;1315773 wrote:Perhaps if the govt got the **** out of the health care industry it would be affordable for everyone.

  only in the fantasy land of free market healthcare where the poor will not need to live and breath.
• WebFire

  isadore;1315782 wrote:only in the fantasy land of free market healthcare where the poor will not need to live and breath.

  Only in fantasy land (or socialism land, your choice) do we have the money to give everyone healthcare. And gov't being in healthcare usually doesn't mean good healthcare.
• isadore

  WebFire;1315824 wrote:Only in fantasy land (or socialism land, your choice) do we have the money to give everyone healthcare. And gov't being in healthcare usually doesn't mean good healthcare.

  gosh a ruddies nations like norway, sweden, denmark, netherlands, germany, canada all seem to be able to provided medical care for their citizens, we should be able to do it.
• gut

  isadore;1315846 wrote:gosh a ruddies nations like norway, sweden, denmark, netherlands, germany, canada all seem to be able to provided medical care for their citizens, we should be able to do it.

  It helps with the US subsidizing the R&D costs.
• WebFire

  isadore;1315846 wrote:gosh a ruddies nations like norway, sweden, denmark, netherlands, germany, canada all seem to be able to provided medical care for their citizens, we should be able to do it.

  SMH
• Sonofanump

  isadore;1315846 wrote:gosh a ruddies nations like norway, sweden, denmark, netherlands, germany, canada all seem to be able to provided medical care for their citizens, we should be able to do it.

  Derp, that is why foreigners come to the US for treatment. Does the Saudi Price fly to Norway or Germany for his treatment? Gosh a ruddies no.
• isadore

  Sonofanump;1315873 wrote:Derp, that is why foreigners come to the US for treatment. Does the Saudi Price fly to Norway or Germany for his treatment? Gosh a ruddies no.

  gosh a ruddies I don't know about "the Saudi Price" but i do know the average German or Norwegian lives longer than the average American. I know a baby born in Germany or Norway has a better chance of survival than one born in the United States. In both countries better care at a lower cost.
• isadore

  gut;1315849 wrote:It helps with the US subsidizing the R&D costs.

  gosh a ruddies we must be pretty stupid for doing that because of how our government allows drug companies and others to rip us off.
• gut

  isadore;1315922 wrote:gosh a ruddies we must be pretty stupid for doing that because of how our government allows drug companies and others to rip us off.

  Yeah, that's what it means to subsidize something. They make their profit in the US because they're squeezed elsewhere by these nationalized plans.
  
  What that ultimately means is, yes, you'll be able to get "affordable" treatment, there just won't be any good drugs to treat you with because there's no money in it. They've already been chopping R&D investment for years and Obamakare will only make that worse.
• isadore

  gut;1315934 wrote:Yeah, that's what it means to subsidize something. They make their profit in the US because they're squeezed elsewhere by these nationalized plans.
  
  What that ultimately means is, yes, you'll be able to get "affordable" treatment, there just won't be any good drugs to treat you with because there's no money in it. They've already been chopping R&D investment for years and Obamakare will only make that worse.

  no it would mean they would have to spread the cost around more evenly to other nations rather than inflict it only on Americans.
• Sonofanump

  isadore;1315973 wrote:no it would mean they would have to spread the cost around more evenly rather than inflicted on Americans.

  Tell me moar!