Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Obama Shatters Records With


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#16    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:04 PM

Well, well. Now whatever happened to those poor democrat supporters who can't barely make it and needs government assistance???
Tax the rich! While they give their money to Obama, pathetic!!!

Edited by AROCES, 20 October 2008 - 08:08 PM.


#17    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:07 PM

Anyone read the article that a lot of Obama donations were in the odd numbers? Like $979.45, $723.13 $578.32 or $456.21.

It's been speculated that these are foregn donations and what we see is the dollar excahnge total.


#18    Nxt2Hvn

Nxt2Hvn

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,083 posts
  • Joined:31 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA, North Carolina

  • 'For we walk by faith, not by sight.' II Corinthians 5:7

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:10 PM

AROCES on Oct 20 2008, 08:07 PM, said:

Anyone read the article that a lot of Obama donations were in the odd numbers? Like $979.45, $723.13 $578.32 or $456.21.

It's been speculated that these are foregn donations and what we see is the dollar excahnge total.



Yep.. there is just something about this man that I don't trust.  Call it a hunch ...  hmm.gif

I would rather live my life as if there is a God, and die to find out there isn't, than live my life as if there isn't, and die to find out there is.

Don't be afraid that your life will end, be afraid that it will never begin. ~anonymous~

#19    ravergirl

ravergirl

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined:05 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:texas

  • OPEN your EYES

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:11 PM

The Silver Thong on Oct 20 2008, 02:49 PM, said:

It's all about the glitz and glamour now I'm affraid. Damn most of the ralley's I'v seen look like the halftime show at the superbowl. They should move Washinton D.C. to Hollywood lol.


I don't have a problem with rockstar presidents. I have a problem with rockstar canidates. you should be dirt poor and grovelling (not really but "you know") for the opportunity, privilege, and duty to be the President of this nation. and earn your rewards in action. The post of President was glorified by the acts of the Roosevelts, Lincoln, Washington, Reagan even. It has been villified by some, and it has recently been shat upon. We don't need a revolutionary President, we only need one that can restore honor and faith and fear ((rather than religious terror) which is what fighting terrorism has to be fought with incidentally)

I am theNON-SEQUITUR-ER

#20    AROCES

AROCES

    Forum Divinity

  • Banned
  • 16,312 posts
  • Joined:07 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:16 PM

Nxt2Hvn on Oct 20 2008, 08:10 PM, said:

Yep.. there is just something about this man that I don't trust.  Call it a hunch ...  hmm.gif

Well, could not think of any other logical explanation really.


#21    msmischief

msmischief

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 231 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:32 PM

Wow, people will find anything to complain about won't they?  If I wanted to donate my money to someone, no one has the right to tell me I should spend it elsewhere.  Yes, the economy is bad, but what is $604 million going to do that $700 billion didn't?  This is really silly people.  I'm not even a democrat and I can see that. McCain has more money than Obama, why should either of them be "dirt poor and grovelling"?  I think they have both bettered themselves though out their lives.  I may be wrong, but I wasn't aware that either of them was born into a wealthy family?


#22    ravergirl

ravergirl

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined:05 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:texas

  • OPEN your EYES

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:37 PM

msmischief on Oct 20 2008, 03:32 PM, said:

Wow, people will find anything to complain about won't they?  If I wanted to donate my money to someone, no one has the right to tell me I should spend it elsewhere.  Yes, the economy is bad, but what is $604 million going to do that $700 billion didn't?  This is really silly people.  I'm not even a democrat and I can see that. McCain has more money than Obama, why should either of them be "dirt poor and grovelling"?  I think they have both bettered themselves though out their lives.  I may be wrong, but I wasn't aware that either of them was born into a wealthy family?



Because msmischief, anyone can buy popularity. and Popularity wins you votes, and votes win you electoral votes.

I am theNON-SEQUITUR-ER

#23    msmischief

msmischief

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 231 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 20 October 2008 - 08:56 PM

ravergirl on Oct 20 2008, 01:37 PM, said:

Because msmischief, anyone can buy popularity. and Popularity wins you votes, and votes win you electoral votes.

This is true, but I don't think he is buying popularity.   Obama was already popular, which is why people are donating their money.  He has been around for awhile now.  I first heard about him, probably over 10 years ago.  Friends and coworkers spoke of him as someone to watch, someone with potential.


#24    Sho_Sho

Sho_Sho

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 956 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:St.Louis, MO

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:07 PM

msmischief on Oct 20 2008, 08:56 PM, said:

This is true, but I don't think he is buying popularity.   Obama was already popular, which is why people are donating their money.  He has been around for awhile now.  I first heard about him, probably over 10 years ago.  Friends and coworkers spoke of him as someone to watch, someone with potential.


He has been around a lot less than Palin has, and out of all 3 of her male counter parts she has the most CEO experience than they all have put together. But democrats want to turn her into a "dumb bimbo" because they are scared that she actually single handedly got republicans excited about the presidential race again.

Most republicans did not want McCain to be their presidential nominee, in fact I am still figuring out how the hell he pulled it off? But since Palin has been put in the race republicanís care again, and that gets democrats scared, so they have to turn her into a villain.

When she was on SNL they had the highest rating in YEARS, but as soon as her part was over everyone turned the channel. This says a lot about her popularity that the dems are trying sooooooo hard to tarnish.


I wish I could be as cool as you...and say the things you do

#25    msmischief

msmischief

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 231 posts
  • Joined:16 May 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:US

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:15 PM

Sho_Sho on Oct 20 2008, 02:07 PM, said:

He has been around a lot less than Palin has, and out of all 3 of her male counter parts she has the most CEO experience than they all have put together. But democrats want to turn her into a "dumb bimbo" because they are scared that she actually single handedly got republicans excited about the presidential race again.

Most republicans did not want McCain to be their presidential nominee, in fact I am still figuring out how the hell he pulled it off? But since Palin has been put in the race republicanís care again, and that gets democrats scared, so they have to turn her into a villain.

When she was on SNL they had the highest rating in YEARS, but as soon as her part was over everyone turned the channel. This says a lot about her popularity that the dems are trying sooooooo hard to tarnish.

That's nice, but the topic is not about her.


#26    Sho_Sho

Sho_Sho

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 956 posts
  • Joined:05 Mar 2008
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:St.Louis, MO

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:23 PM

msmischief on Oct 20 2008, 09:15 PM, said:

That's nice, but the topic is not about her.



Oh thatís right I forgot we are only allowed to talk about Obama! And since someone brought up Obama "being around for awhile" since he Obviously has not been on the political scene very long at all,  it would make that statement false. I donít see anything wrong with comparing the two. Since the same argument has been made for Palin not being around that long. I was merely bringing the fact that she has been around just as long and has ACTUALLY accomplished something. I canít say the same for your precious Obama!

But forgive me we only get to talk about Obama! My apologies!






I wish I could be as cool as you...and say the things you do

#27    ravergirl

ravergirl

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,850 posts
  • Joined:05 Dec 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:texas

  • OPEN your EYES

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:26 PM

Sho_Sho on Oct 20 2008, 04:23 PM, said:

Oh thatís right I forgot we are only allowed to talk about Obama! And since someone brought up Obama "being around for awhile" since he Obviously has not been on the political scene very long at all,  it would make that statement false. I donít see anything wrong with comparing the two. Since the same argument has been made for Palin not being around that long. I was merely bringing the fact that she has been around just as long and has ACTUALLY accomplished something. I canít say the same for your precious Obama!

But forgive me we only get to talk about Obama! My apologies!


Obama and Palin are peers and McCain and Biden are peers. The fear i have of Obama is that he will die prematurely, leaving us with BIDEN who is not a satisfactory President. Whereas if McCain goes we would be in capable (albiet controversial) hands

I am theNON-SEQUITUR-ER

#28    SQLserver

SQLserver

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,199 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity"

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:29 PM

Perhaps the money raised by a candidate directly correlates to the popularity of the candidate?

Lol, Obama is inspiring people, and all you can do about it is complain. More people are giving him money BECAUSE they want to see him in the white house.

Tough luck for you.


#29    SQLserver

SQLserver

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,199 posts
  • Joined:18 Nov 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:USA

  • "Never underestimate the power of human stupidity"

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:30 PM

Quote

Whereas if McCain goes we would be in capable (albiet controversial) hands

LOL.


#30    Splodgenessabounds

Splodgenessabounds

    The Artful Splodger

  • Member
  • 2,226 posts
  • Joined:29 May 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Basingstoke, UK

Posted 20 October 2008 - 09:31 PM

I've usually defended Obama on here but this, I don't know and you can correct me if you like.

I equate it to the English Football Premier League.  A few years ago there was a team called Chelsea, they were always the nearly men, always finished 4th in the table and hadn't won a title since 1951.  Then all of a sudden this russian called Roman Abramovich, who is worth £14 billion ($28 billion or there abouts) came along and bought the club giving Chelsea all the money in the world to buy whatever players they need to win the Premier League and other competitions.  Now this seems a little unfair because other clubs, Manchester United for one, had spent decades building good football teams, winning championships, spreading there influence around the world (except america) and in the end became very rich.  They earnt there place at the top, whilst Chelsea just became without earning anything.

All of a sudden Chelsea were buying players left and right.  One club would offer a club to buy a player for £20 million and give the player £50,000 a week, then Chelsea would offer the club £30 million and offer the player £100,000 a week.  They didn't need him, they would buy him so the other team couldn't strengthen and challenge them.  In the next three years they came 2nd, 1st, 1st in the league and won most of the cup competitions as well.  They didn't deserve to, they just threw enough money around until no other club could compete where as other clubs who had built dynasties over a 100 years didn't get anything for their hard work.

Isn't this what Obama is doing?  Just throwing millions and millions at his campaign while McCain, using public funding like evry other candidate had done since Watergate, is falling by the wayside.  Is Obama the evil Chelsea and is McCain the hard-graft Manchester United.

I'll finish with a nice twist which should suit Republicans.

This year in the European Cup Final, Chelsea played Manchester United.  Manchester United won.

Chelsea play in BLUE (Democrat, Obama)

Manchester United play in RED (Republican, McCain)

Money helps achieve success, but it doesn't garentee success.


"It doesn't matter if it is a black cat or a white cat.  As long as it can catch mice, it's a good cat."
Deng Xiaoping

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules."
Walter Sobchak - The Big Lebowski




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users