Well based on his record as CEO of Bain corporation I would say Romney's plan would be to send jobs overseas- look at Romney's track record and how many jobs was sent overseas and people laid off when he was CEO of Bain: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ey-job-killer/
And this is the GOP frontrunner for POTUS LMFAO!!!!!!!
- wellendowed1911
- 11-10-2011, 09:27 PM
- gnadfly
- 11-10-2011, 09:35 PM
So he's another Jeffery Immelt?
- Rogue_Gent
- 11-10-2011, 09:39 PM
That's what America needs ...even less tax for the 1% and even less regulation to shackle Wall Street. If America buys this, then Abe Lincoln was wrong: You can fool all the people all the time.
- wellendowed1911
- 11-10-2011, 09:45 PM
So he's another Jeffery Immelt? Originally Posted by gnadflyI agree right is right wrong is wrong Jeff Immelt is a scum bag for taking jobs from Americans and shipping them to China of all places- add to the fact GE paid no taxes! Why Obama would appoint someone to an economic recovery board and that individual sends jobs overseas is not cool(Hey Whirly you see I do call out Obama if he makes a foolish move) although GE's plan to move jobs overseas was after Obama appointed him- but nevertheless the main difference between the two is at least Mr. Immelt is not running for POTUS and campaigning about how he will create jobs.
- cptjohnstone
- 11-10-2011, 10:23 PM
That's what America needs ...even less tax for the 1% and even less regulation to shackle Wall Street. If America buys this, then Abe Lincoln was wrong: You can fool all the people all the time. Originally Posted by Rogue_GentI believe that was BT Barnum
http://www.goodreads.com/author/quot...036.P_T_Barnum
- gnadfly
- 11-10-2011, 11:37 PM
I agree right is right wrong is wrong Jeff Immelt is a scum bag for taking jobs from Americans and shipping them to China of all places- add to the fact GE paid no taxes why Obama would appoint someone to an economic recovery board and that individual sends jobs overseas is not cool- although GE's plan to move jobs overseas was after Obama appointed him- but nevertheless the main difference between the two is at least Mr. Immelt is not running for POTUS and campaigning about how he will create jobs. Originally Posted by wellendowed1911Candidate Obama specifically promised to do something to prevent American companies from off-shoring jobs. GE, along with most Fortune 100 companies, have had long standing plans and actions to offshore jobs or bring talent over from overseas to the US to displace American jobs for the last decade. I see it everyday being in IT and know what the top consulting firms are saying to US management. To say that those plans weren't in place is naive and disingenuous.
- wellendowed1911
- 11-10-2011, 11:41 PM
Candidate Obama specifically promised to do something to prevent American companies from off-shoring jobs. GE, along with most Fortune 100 companies, have had long standing plans and actions to offshore jobs or bring talent over from overseas to the US to displace American jobs for the last decade. I see it everyday being in IT and know what the top consulting firms are saying to US management. To say that those plans weren't in place is naive and disingenuous. Originally Posted by gnadflyWhat I am saying is I doubt very seriously if the decision was out or made official to move jobs from America to China- I doubt very seriously Obama would have appointed him- that's just my opinion- the fact of the matter is the appointment was made before GE decided to ship the jovs to China or before the talks.
- CuteOldGuy
- 11-10-2011, 11:47 PM
Obama appointed him because HE HAS MONEY! That's all that counts. Let him ship all his jobs overseas, as long as he donates to Obama, he is Friend of Barry #1.
Obama doesn't believe the shit he says (and neither do the Republicans). It's all a show. It's designed to fool the dumb masses into thinking that they care about them and want to do what is right. They don't. They want to exploit and retain power.
Obama doesn't believe the shit he says (and neither do the Republicans). It's all a show. It's designed to fool the dumb masses into thinking that they care about them and want to do what is right. They don't. They want to exploit and retain power.
- gnadfly
- 11-11-2011, 08:40 AM
Right COG. I would add that Obama is in GE's pocket. They owned MSNBC that gave him 100% positive coverage throughout the campaign and his presidency. Also, GE benefits hugely from Obama's Green Agenda.
No, WE1911, the Obama admin just did another bad job of vetting the appointment. I'm sure GE had an exploratory committee and were under negotiations with the Chinese long before the announcement. Although I don't have time to look it up, my guess is this isn't the first thing that GE has offshored.
No, WE1911, the Obama admin just did another bad job of vetting the appointment. I'm sure GE had an exploratory committee and were under negotiations with the Chinese long before the announcement. Although I don't have time to look it up, my guess is this isn't the first thing that GE has offshored.
- CuteOldGuy
- 11-11-2011, 08:48 AM
- Whirlaway
- 11-11-2011, 08:49 AM
Keystone Cops
The Obama administration has been dithering since the summer on the Keystone XL pipeline. For his labor allies, the project could result in 13,000 union jobs, another 118,000 spin-off jobs and some $20 billion in investment.
By COLLIN LEVY
The Obama administration has been dithering since the summer on the Keystone XL pipeline, a TransCanada pipeline that would eventually bring about 830,000 barrels of crude from Alberta to Gulf Coast refineries in Texas and Oklahoma. For President Obama's labor allies, the project could result in 13,000 union jobs, another 118,000 spin-off jobs and some $20 billion in investment. As an economic booster, that's a good measure better than the administration's record on loan guarantees for green energy companies.
But who needs energy security or job creation when you have environmental activists? In Nebraska on Tuesday, lawmakers opened a special legislative session as opponents of the plan sought to reroute the pipeline. Also raging against the plan are Mr. Obama's environmental constituents, who fear the pipeline would leak or harm forests in pass-through states, despite evidence to the contrary. Mr. Obama played to the fears in his Nebraska interview, noting that Nebraska folks didn't want the extra jobs the project would bring "if it means our kids are potentially drinking water that would damage their health."
The decision to proceed with the pipeline technically falls with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and some expected Mr. Obama might try to keep any decision at arm's length to defray the political fallout. In an interview with Omaha TV station KETV on Tuesday, however, Mr. Obama said that the State Department would be bringing the final report to him and that he would be considering the "health" of the American people, as well as "what's best for our economy short term and long term."
Since the TransCanada Pipeline filed for approval back in 2008, the project has undergone innumerable reviews by regulatory agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation. The State Department's Environmental Impact Review found that the plan would have no significant irreparable effect on the environment. A White House decision is expected by the end of the year
The Obama administration has been dithering since the summer on the Keystone XL pipeline. For his labor allies, the project could result in 13,000 union jobs, another 118,000 spin-off jobs and some $20 billion in investment.
By COLLIN LEVY
The Obama administration has been dithering since the summer on the Keystone XL pipeline, a TransCanada pipeline that would eventually bring about 830,000 barrels of crude from Alberta to Gulf Coast refineries in Texas and Oklahoma. For President Obama's labor allies, the project could result in 13,000 union jobs, another 118,000 spin-off jobs and some $20 billion in investment. As an economic booster, that's a good measure better than the administration's record on loan guarantees for green energy companies.
But who needs energy security or job creation when you have environmental activists? In Nebraska on Tuesday, lawmakers opened a special legislative session as opponents of the plan sought to reroute the pipeline. Also raging against the plan are Mr. Obama's environmental constituents, who fear the pipeline would leak or harm forests in pass-through states, despite evidence to the contrary. Mr. Obama played to the fears in his Nebraska interview, noting that Nebraska folks didn't want the extra jobs the project would bring "if it means our kids are potentially drinking water that would damage their health."
The decision to proceed with the pipeline technically falls with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and some expected Mr. Obama might try to keep any decision at arm's length to defray the political fallout. In an interview with Omaha TV station KETV on Tuesday, however, Mr. Obama said that the State Department would be bringing the final report to him and that he would be considering the "health" of the American people, as well as "what's best for our economy short term and long term."
Since the TransCanada Pipeline filed for approval back in 2008, the project has undergone innumerable reviews by regulatory agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation. The State Department's Environmental Impact Review found that the plan would have no significant irreparable effect on the environment. A White House decision is expected by the end of the year
- Whirlaway
- 11-11-2011, 08:57 AM
Democrats were trounced in Tuesday's state legislature election, despite the president's heavy investment of time in the state.
That would be David Plouffe, President Obama's former campaign manager and current senior strategist, who is focused today on how to cobble together 270 electoral votes for re-election. That's proving tough, what with the economy hurting Mr. Obama in states like Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania that he won in 2008. The White House's response has been to pin its hopes on a more roundabout path to electoral victory, one based on the Southern and Western states Mr. Obama also claimed in 2008.
States like Virginia. Mr. Obama was the first Democrat to win Virginia since 1964; he beat John McCain by seven percentage points; and he did so on the strength of his appeal to Northern Virginia's many white-collar independents. Along with victories in North Carolina, Colorado and Nevada, the Obama Old Dominion win in 2008 inspired a flurry of stories about how Democrats had forever altered the political map.
So the White House is pouring resources into what Tim Kaine, the state's former Democratic governor, now pridefully refers to as Democrats' "New Dominion." The Obama campaign has held some 1,600 events in the state in the last half-year alone. Only last month Mr. Obama hopped a three-day bus trip through Virginia and North Carolina. Obama officials keep flocking to the state, and Tuesday's election was to offer the first indication of how these efforts are succeeding.
Let's just say the New Dominion is looking an awful lot like the Old Dominion. If anything, more so.
Democrats were trounced in Tuesday's state legislature election, despite the president's heavy investment of time in the state.
Virginia Republicans added seven new seats to their majority in the House of Delegates, giving them two-thirds of that chamber's votes—the party's largest margin in history. The GOP also took over the Virginia Senate in results that were especially notable, given that Virginia Democrats this spring crafted an aggressive redistricting plan that had only one aim: providing a firewall against a Republican takeover of that chamber. Even that extreme gerrymander didn't work.
Every Republican incumbent—52 in the House, 15 in the Senate—won. The state GOP is looking at unified control over government for only the second time since the Civil War. This is after winning all three top statewide offices—including the election of Gov. Bob McDonnell—in 2009, and picking off three U.S. House Democrats in last year's midterms.
Topline figures aside, what ought to really concern the White House was the nature of the campaign, and the breakout of Tuesday's election data. Mr. Obama may have big plans for Virginia, but the question is increasingly: him and what army?
Elected state Democrats—who form the backbone of grass-roots movements—couldn't distance themselves far enough from Mr. Obama in this race. Most refused to mention the president, to defend his policies, or to appear with him. The more Republicans sought to nationalize the Virginia campaign, the more Democrats stressed local issues.
State House Minority Leader Ward Armstrong felt compelled to run an ad protesting that it was a "stretch" for his GOP opponent to "compare me to Barack Obama." After all, he was "pro-life, pro-gun and I always put Virginia first." (Mr. Armstrong lost on Tuesday.)
Virginia Democrats were happy to identify with one top official: Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, who is providing a lesson in the benefits of smart GOP governance in battleground states. Criticized as being too socially conservative for Virginia when he was elected in 2009, Mr. McDonnell has won over voters by focusing on the economy and jobs. His approval ratings are in the 60s, and he helped raise some $5 million for local candidates. He's popular enough that Democrats took to including pictures of him in their campaign literature, and bragging that they'd worked with him.
Mr. McDonnell has been particularly adept at connecting with the independent, white-collar voters Mr. Obama used to win Virginia in 2008. That crowd lives in North Virginia's booming exurb counties of Prince William and Loudoun, and presidential races hinge on their votes. Mr. Obama's 2008 victory in Virginia rested on his significant wins in both Loudoun (8%) and Prince Williams (16%).
Yet Tuesday's results showed the extent to which that support has reversed. Loudoun in particular proved an unmitigated rout for Democrats. Republicans won or held three of four of the county's Senate seats. It swept all seven of the county's House seats. It won all nine slots on the county's Board of Supervisors, and pretty much every other county office. In Prince William, the story was much the same. This is what happens when a recent Quinnipiac poll shows Mr. Obama's approval rating among Virginia independents at 29%.
Democrats are now arguing that turnout (about 30%) was too low to prove anything, but then again, the particularly low Democratic turnout suggests that, on top of everything else, the White House really does face an enthusiasm gap. It's still got time to try to remedy that problem, and some other Virginia fundamentals. But going by Tuesday's results, Mr. Plouffe might need to start considering Electoral Plan C.
Write to kim@wsj.com
- By KIMBERLEY A. STRASSEL
That would be David Plouffe, President Obama's former campaign manager and current senior strategist, who is focused today on how to cobble together 270 electoral votes for re-election. That's proving tough, what with the economy hurting Mr. Obama in states like Ohio, Indiana and Pennsylvania that he won in 2008. The White House's response has been to pin its hopes on a more roundabout path to electoral victory, one based on the Southern and Western states Mr. Obama also claimed in 2008.
States like Virginia. Mr. Obama was the first Democrat to win Virginia since 1964; he beat John McCain by seven percentage points; and he did so on the strength of his appeal to Northern Virginia's many white-collar independents. Along with victories in North Carolina, Colorado and Nevada, the Obama Old Dominion win in 2008 inspired a flurry of stories about how Democrats had forever altered the political map.
So the White House is pouring resources into what Tim Kaine, the state's former Democratic governor, now pridefully refers to as Democrats' "New Dominion." The Obama campaign has held some 1,600 events in the state in the last half-year alone. Only last month Mr. Obama hopped a three-day bus trip through Virginia and North Carolina. Obama officials keep flocking to the state, and Tuesday's election was to offer the first indication of how these efforts are succeeding.
Let's just say the New Dominion is looking an awful lot like the Old Dominion. If anything, more so.
Democrats were trounced in Tuesday's state legislature election, despite the president's heavy investment of time in the state.
Virginia Republicans added seven new seats to their majority in the House of Delegates, giving them two-thirds of that chamber's votes—the party's largest margin in history. The GOP also took over the Virginia Senate in results that were especially notable, given that Virginia Democrats this spring crafted an aggressive redistricting plan that had only one aim: providing a firewall against a Republican takeover of that chamber. Even that extreme gerrymander didn't work.
Every Republican incumbent—52 in the House, 15 in the Senate—won. The state GOP is looking at unified control over government for only the second time since the Civil War. This is after winning all three top statewide offices—including the election of Gov. Bob McDonnell—in 2009, and picking off three U.S. House Democrats in last year's midterms.
Topline figures aside, what ought to really concern the White House was the nature of the campaign, and the breakout of Tuesday's election data. Mr. Obama may have big plans for Virginia, but the question is increasingly: him and what army?
Elected state Democrats—who form the backbone of grass-roots movements—couldn't distance themselves far enough from Mr. Obama in this race. Most refused to mention the president, to defend his policies, or to appear with him. The more Republicans sought to nationalize the Virginia campaign, the more Democrats stressed local issues.
State House Minority Leader Ward Armstrong felt compelled to run an ad protesting that it was a "stretch" for his GOP opponent to "compare me to Barack Obama." After all, he was "pro-life, pro-gun and I always put Virginia first." (Mr. Armstrong lost on Tuesday.)
Virginia Democrats were happy to identify with one top official: Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell, who is providing a lesson in the benefits of smart GOP governance in battleground states. Criticized as being too socially conservative for Virginia when he was elected in 2009, Mr. McDonnell has won over voters by focusing on the economy and jobs. His approval ratings are in the 60s, and he helped raise some $5 million for local candidates. He's popular enough that Democrats took to including pictures of him in their campaign literature, and bragging that they'd worked with him.
Mr. McDonnell has been particularly adept at connecting with the independent, white-collar voters Mr. Obama used to win Virginia in 2008. That crowd lives in North Virginia's booming exurb counties of Prince William and Loudoun, and presidential races hinge on their votes. Mr. Obama's 2008 victory in Virginia rested on his significant wins in both Loudoun (8%) and Prince Williams (16%).
Yet Tuesday's results showed the extent to which that support has reversed. Loudoun in particular proved an unmitigated rout for Democrats. Republicans won or held three of four of the county's Senate seats. It swept all seven of the county's House seats. It won all nine slots on the county's Board of Supervisors, and pretty much every other county office. In Prince William, the story was much the same. This is what happens when a recent Quinnipiac poll shows Mr. Obama's approval rating among Virginia independents at 29%.
Democrats are now arguing that turnout (about 30%) was too low to prove anything, but then again, the particularly low Democratic turnout suggests that, on top of everything else, the White House really does face an enthusiasm gap. It's still got time to try to remedy that problem, and some other Virginia fundamentals. But going by Tuesday's results, Mr. Plouffe might need to start considering Electoral Plan C.
Write to kim@wsj.com
- Whirlaway
- 11-11-2011, 09:45 AM
Poll: Romney Would Beat Obama If Election Was Today
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September
November 4, 2011 RSS Feed Print
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — President Barack Obama's fortunes are improving slightly, although he would face a tough struggle for re-election next year if Mitt Romney were the Republican nominee, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said Friday.
Forty-nine percent of Americans approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president, up from 47 percent in an October poll.
Obama's disapproval rating held steady at 50 percent.
While still low, the percentage of Americans who believe the country is headed in the right direction also increased, to 25 from 21 in the previous survey. The percentage who feel it is on the wrong track slipped to 70 from 74, the survey said.
The poll showed Obama would finish just behind Romney if the November 2012 presidential election were held today, with the former Massachusetts governor at 44 percent and Obama at 43 percent among registered voters.
It was the first Reuters/Ipsos poll to show Romney ahead, although his slim lead is within the survey's margin of error and technically a dead heat.
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September.
Ipsos pollster Julia Clark said the signs pointed to a close 2012 election.
"Romney, and the Republican field generally, are becoming more well-known to the American electorate, and I think we are going to see this narrow gap now between the Republican front-runners and Obama going forward," she said.
"It's essential that Obama retain these high approval ratings," she said.
The Democratic president was ahead of two of the other Republicans vying for the nomination to oppose him next November. He led businessman Herman Cain by 46 percent to 41 percent and was ahead of Texas Governor Rick Perry by 47 percent to 41 percent.
The poll was taken as news reports about sexual harassment allegations against Cain in the 1990s broke.
The poll was conducted from Oct. 31 to Thursday. It interviewed 1,106 adults, of whom 937 were registered voters. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for all adults, and plus or minus 3.2 percentage points for registered voters.
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September
November 4, 2011 RSS Feed Print
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — President Barack Obama's fortunes are improving slightly, although he would face a tough struggle for re-election next year if Mitt Romney were the Republican nominee, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said Friday.
Forty-nine percent of Americans approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president, up from 47 percent in an October poll.
Obama's disapproval rating held steady at 50 percent.
While still low, the percentage of Americans who believe the country is headed in the right direction also increased, to 25 from 21 in the previous survey. The percentage who feel it is on the wrong track slipped to 70 from 74, the survey said.
The poll showed Obama would finish just behind Romney if the November 2012 presidential election were held today, with the former Massachusetts governor at 44 percent and Obama at 43 percent among registered voters.
It was the first Reuters/Ipsos poll to show Romney ahead, although his slim lead is within the survey's margin of error and technically a dead heat.
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September.
Ipsos pollster Julia Clark said the signs pointed to a close 2012 election.
"Romney, and the Republican field generally, are becoming more well-known to the American electorate, and I think we are going to see this narrow gap now between the Republican front-runners and Obama going forward," she said.
"It's essential that Obama retain these high approval ratings," she said.
The Democratic president was ahead of two of the other Republicans vying for the nomination to oppose him next November. He led businessman Herman Cain by 46 percent to 41 percent and was ahead of Texas Governor Rick Perry by 47 percent to 41 percent.
The poll was taken as news reports about sexual harassment allegations against Cain in the 1990s broke.
The poll was conducted from Oct. 31 to Thursday. It interviewed 1,106 adults, of whom 937 were registered voters. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for all adults, and plus or minus 3.2 percentage points for registered voters.
- wellendowed1911
- 11-11-2011, 05:40 PM
Poll: Romney Would Beat Obama If Election Was TodaySo let me ask you Whirly does Poll matter yes or No? Because a week ago I posted a poll that was favorable towards Obama and you said the polls don't matter- also I can post 2 polls that show Obama beating every GOP candidate as of today and besides today is not 11-4-2012 and we don't live by what' If's- If the UE rate was 2% today Obama would win by a landslide- If Rick Perry didn't do bad in the debates Perry would be the top nominee- so again I ask you Whirlway- are polls important or not????
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September
November 4, 2011 RSS Feed Print
WASHINGTON (Reuters) — President Barack Obama's fortunes are improving slightly, although he would face a tough struggle for re-election next year if Mitt Romney were the Republican nominee, a Reuters/Ipsos poll said Friday.
Forty-nine percent of Americans approve of the way Obama is handling his job as president, up from 47 percent in an October poll.
Obama's disapproval rating held steady at 50 percent.
While still low, the percentage of Americans who believe the country is headed in the right direction also increased, to 25 from 21 in the previous survey. The percentage who feel it is on the wrong track slipped to 70 from 74, the survey said.
The poll showed Obama would finish just behind Romney if the November 2012 presidential election were held today, with the former Massachusetts governor at 44 percent and Obama at 43 percent among registered voters.
It was the first Reuters/Ipsos poll to show Romney ahead, although his slim lead is within the survey's margin of error and technically a dead heat.
Obama led Romney by 6 percentage points when the same question was asked in a poll in September.
Ipsos pollster Julia Clark said the signs pointed to a close 2012 election.
"Romney, and the Republican field generally, are becoming more well-known to the American electorate, and I think we are going to see this narrow gap now between the Republican front-runners and Obama going forward," she said.
"It's essential that Obama retain these high approval ratings," she said.
The Democratic president was ahead of two of the other Republicans vying for the nomination to oppose him next November. He led businessman Herman Cain by 46 percent to 41 percent and was ahead of Texas Governor Rick Perry by 47 percent to 41 percent.
The poll was taken as news reports about sexual harassment allegations against Cain in the 1990s broke.
The poll was conducted from Oct. 31 to Thursday. It interviewed 1,106 adults, of whom 937 were registered voters. The margin of error was plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for all adults, and plus or minus 3.2 percentage points for registered voters. Originally Posted by Whirlaway
http://www.nationalpolls.com/2012/obama-vs-romney.html
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/
- gnadfly
- 11-12-2011, 10:54 AM
Hey Well. Confirmation of what you said earlier in the thread.
From http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/12/bu...pagewanted=all
From http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/12/bu...pagewanted=all
But there is no doubt that the deals are lucrative for the companies involved.
G.E., for example, lobbied Congress in 2009 to help expand the subsidy programs, and it now profits from every aspect of the boom in renewable-power plant construction.
It is also an investor in one solar and one wind project that have secured about $2 billion in federal loan guarantees and expects to collect nearly $1 billion in Treasury grants. The company has also won hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts to sell its turbines to wind plants built with public subsidies.