Please log in to view images

« prev   random   next »

4
1

Pre-Debate Election market

By marcus follow marcus   2012 Oct 3, 9:59am 8,914 views   46 comments   watch   nsfw   quote   share    


AS expected, a big uptick in Romney. It's either a start of his return, or sellers are getting their last decent selling opportunity.

Just a few days ago if you want to sell Romney, you could have only gotten .19.

Now if you want to buy Romney going into the debate, you will have to pay nearly .30. High today: .34

http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Pres12_quotes.html

#elections

« First    « Previous    Comments 7 - 46 of 46    Last »

7   Raw   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 1:00pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I am still supporting Obama, but this independent is extremely disappointed with Obama in this debate.
Congratulations Romney on your victory.

8   Bap33   ignore (7)   2012 Oct 3, 1:09pm     ↓ dislike (4)   quote   flag        

Barry was a turd without someone feeding him lines. A complete turd.

Romney is just big gov with an R, and I do not like that, but he is much better for America than Barry.

9   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 3, 1:15pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Obama seemed to have decided not to defend. He didn't want to spend too much of his limited time defending for example claims about the 716 billion cut to medicare.

The ones who care about it and who are capable of understanding it will look in to it.

But I agree that Obam didn't as they say bring his A game.

We will see.

10   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 3, 1:15pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

Its already over, it was over during the first 30 minutes.
Congratulation to our new President, Mitt Romney.
Chris Mattews on MSNBC is very sad and crying.

11   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 3, 1:17pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

Its already over, it was over during the first 30 minutes.

Then hurry up and put your money where your mouth is. You can still get 2:1.

Oh, I forgot, you're all bs, you say only what you hope, not what you really believe.

If you believe that Romney has a 50:50 chance or better of winning, then you're a fool not to take 2:1.

12   Scagnetti   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 1:28pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

The way I saw the debate was, Romney was on the offensive for almost the entire debate. He also spoke eloquently and presented his thoughts well, albeit without much detail.

Obama was on the defensive as I would expect. Being a president in shaky times like these, creates many opportunities for criticism and in a lot of ways, rightfully so.

The only thing that surprised me, was that Obama appeared to be a broken man. I didn't see much fight in him. He very well may win this election but, the fervor of his promise of "Hope and Change" seems to be gone.

13   Bap33   ignore (7)   2012 Oct 3, 1:31pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

marcus,
I would say that 90% of those who are going to vote - both sides - will not be changing their vote due to anything said during the debates, or for any other reason. They have already picked their guy at this time. It is a small minority that are wishy-washy and think that watching the dog+pony show is how to make up one's mind. Would you agree?

14   Jeremy   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 2:02pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Finally, some intelligent conversation. (From you guys, not those knuckleheads on stage) Clearly Romney smoked Obama in this debate. I certainly agree with Bap, that this debate will have little to no effect on Voters opinions. Scagnetti, you're dead on. Obama seemed very broken. Stammered like a drunk guy trying to pick up on a fat chick. (Like he wasn't sure if he was really into it or not). Too bad both guys are just bullshitting the American people. 12 million jobs my ass!

15   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 3, 2:15pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

Tingle turning into gang green... at MSNBC poor Chris!

Chris Matthews' Epic Meltdown Over Obama Debate

16   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 3, 2:19pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

I would say that 90% of those who are going to vote - both sides - will not be changing their vote due to anything said during the debates, or for any other reason.

60-40 for Romney. The debate was more like first 3 rounds with Tyson.

17   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2012 Oct 3, 2:29pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

I guess the the Democrats had more faith in their campaign of negative reinforcement, having internet schills and trolls to dislike people voicing their concerns, and liking their bullying with 5 to 10 auxiliary logins in all of the news comments and forums. That the President was convinced that he didn't need to have any substance. I saw a spankin' tonight.

Obama never recovered from Romney referencing his disciplining his 5 Boys for repeating a lie so many times until they begin to believe it them selves. His demenor dropped and he sulked and had a lectured demeanor. He was probably thinking... "Ah Hell Nah! I know he ditint just call me BOY!

18   Scagnetti   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 2:33pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

Tingle turning into gang green... at MSNBC poor Chris!

Chris Matthews' Epic Meltdown Over Obama Debate

Wow! That video reminds we why I stopped watching T.V. 5 years ago!

What happened to reporters just reporting the news instead of giving their political opinions? I think the "news" as a whole is a disgrace.

What's really a shame is most people don't want to think. They will take Chris Matthews or Bill O'reilly's or (Insert name here) opinions as gospel instead of thinking for themselves. Even for those who notice a bias in the commentary are still affected over time subconsciously when ideas and opinions are repeated to them enough.

19   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 3, 2:56pm     ↓ dislike (4)   quote   flag        

CaptainShuddup says

Obama never recovered from Romney referencing his disciplining his 5 Boys for repeating a lie so many times until they begin to believe it them selves. His demenor dropped and he sulked and had a lectured demeanor. He was probably thinking... "Ah Hell Nah! I know he ditint just call me BOY!

that was funny!

20   Raw   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 2:58pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Congratulations Republicans, you won the battle tonight.
You still have to win the war.

21   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 3, 3:07pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

CaptainShuddup says

liking their bullying with 5 to 10 auxiliary logins in all of the news comments and forums

Just like here on patnet ?

All the right wingers sound legit, reflecting realistic opinions of intelligent successful people.

And then there's a bunch of wacko liberals, who are dimwits, many of whom have multiple logins, or have changed their handles many times, and sound like semi-retarded children spouting nothing but emotion.

22   Philistine   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 5:10pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Bap33 says

I would say that 90% of those who are going to vote - both sides - will not be changing their vote due to anything said during the debates

100% correct, as proven by every debate in every presidential election in the last 50 years.

23   lisalisa   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 3, 9:54pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Watched it on CBS... afterwards it sounded like Obama won it, with all of the commentators and analysts... oops I forgot... biased media..... I had to turn the channel and listen to something else... CBS= Conservative Bashing System

24   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2012 Oct 3, 10:03pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

marcus says

Just like here on patnet ?

And the CNN comments section.
Fox news actually stopped comments on articles because Liberals would go there bully everyone that didn't think Obama wasn't Black Jesus. The word racist was used so many times in every article with George Zimmerman's name in it. Race baiters, bullies and hater haters.

25   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 3, 10:44pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Romney kicked Obama's ass.

The guy was prepared while Obama clearly was not. Romney knew everything Obama was going to say and had believale responses to nearly everything. He was aggressive and always seemed to get the last word on nearly every point.

That his "facts" were disingenuous would be putting it lightly, however.

1. Romney has now added, under his breath "when you include growth" into his argument that his tax plan will not either blow up the deficit or shift burden to the middle and lower classes. This is still clearly a lie but he recognizes America was at least smart enough to question how it would be possible, so he added the caveat under his breath. Good job America...

2. 90 billion in tax cuts for Green energy, Solyndra, etc. - "You only pick losers." One of the best moments of the debate for Romney and Obama had no response....great point EXCEPT the 90 billion number is including tax credits for green energy that went to the American people, NOT Green Energy companies like Solyndra. The majority of this figure was for Energy Star Appliances, Hybrid Vehicles, Energy Efficient Window replacement, Energy Efficient HVAC systems, and the like.

3. 716 billion in Medicare cuts. Obama explained the truth behind this one, which has been deemed "Liar, Liar, pants on fire" all over the internet. But Obama let Romney go WAY too easily on it, and Romney was even more convincing. I would wager the majority of those watching the debate who were unaware of the facts would tend to believe Romney.

Overall terrible job by Obama. He didn't even look like he wanted to be there which is unfortunate because he could have dealt a knockout blow.

Kudos to Romney for showing up prepared.

26   Tenpoundbass   ignore (15)   2012 Oct 3, 11:02pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

The Tampa Times assured Obama he had it in the bag.
What they only sent their village idiot over here to bombard the message boards with a post a minute, with versions of Romney's policy that conflicted with what he said last night.

Early on the Liberals have been warning us about all of the republican superpac money, when in reality in practice it's been the Liberals running a deceptive hyper propaganda campaign and negative reinforcement. Romney has almost just kept his cool, hasn't made any outlandish claims.

27   American in Japan   ignore (0)   2012 Oct 3, 11:10pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

I agree with Marcus however this goes, more people should put their money where their mouth is if they are going to confidently predict outcomes.

>100% correct, as proven by every debate in every presidential election in the last 50 years.

Agreed!

If Romney wins this election, it will be interesting to see how much more the US will spend on the military (but I digress)...

28   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 3, 11:13pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

MAybe because of his huge lead, OBama let Romney win. He figures the race will get closer and therefore people will tune in and hear both sides more.

That's good isn't it ?

29   PeopleUnited   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 4, 1:30pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Msnbc: my socialist "news" broadcasting company

thomaswong.1986 says

Tingle turning into gang green... at MSNBC poor Chris!

Chris Matthews' Epic Meltdown Over Obama Debate

30   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 4, 2:06pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

That his "facts" were disingenuous would be putting it lightly, however.

You should add..

1) deductions for moving jobs overseas.. doesnt exist

2) calling depletion accounting for oil companies a govt subsidy.. what do you call cost of goods sold and matching principle between revenues and costs of revenue.
None of this any govt subsidy.

31   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 4, 2:22pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

You should add..

1) deductions for moving jobs overseas.. doesnt exist

Deducting business expenses for moving DOES exist...

thomaswong.1986 says

calling depletion accounting for oil companies a govt subsidy..

Depletion accounting while drilling on public land IS a subsidy.

32   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 4, 2:26pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Not to burst all the right winger's bubbles today, but....

33   marcus   ignore (12)   2012 Oct 4, 2:29pm     ↓ dislike (1)   quote   flag        

Amazing considering that we're in a depression.

Truthfully though, this is rigged for Obama to win. They wouldn't put forward a guy who wants to do massive tax cuts for the rich (and even runs on that) if they wanted the republican to win. What, do you think they're stupid ?

34   Bap33   ignore (7)   2012 Oct 5, 4:04am     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

it's the "they" in your post that "we" need to get rid of right away

35   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 5, 7:27am     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

calling depletion accounting for oil companies a govt subsidy..

Depletion accounting while drilling on public land IS a subsidy.

No! its no different than cost of goods sold for any product.. basic accounting.

What do you call the Royalties paid to Federal Govt for drilling on public lands?

Today, Billions in Royalties are being paid by oil companies to produce natural gas,
money that can go down to reduce the debt.. yet Feds unwilling to do what makes sense.

36   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 5, 7:29am     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

Deducting business expenses for moving DOES exist...

Show me THAT expense on any Income statement for example Apple or HP ?

37   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 5, 2:17pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

david1 says

calling depletion accounting for oil companies a govt subsidy..

Depletion accounting while drilling on public land IS a subsidy.

No! its no different than cost of goods sold for any product.. basic accounting.

What do you call the Royalties paid to Federal Govt for drilling on public lands?

Today, Billions in Royalties are being paid by oil companies to produce natural gas,

money that can go down to reduce the debt.. yet Feds unwilling to do what makes sense.

Royalties are a cost of good sold. Depletion accounting on land owned by the company is also a cost of good sold.

Let me spell it out for you. Royalties are like the interest expense on borrowing money to purchase the land. That is obviously deductable. Depletion accounting exists to compensate the owner for the lost value of his land. If the oil company does not own the land, it should not deduct the depletion value. But since the oil company has leased the rights to the land, they are allowed to deplete the value of those leasehold rights. They can book the value of those leasehold rights at many times what they pay for them to maximize the depletion deduction.

But they are paying royalties too...so they are double counting that cost of goods sold.

That we allow for-profit companies to deplete public natural resources at all while making profit is another discussion...

38   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 5, 2:21pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

Show me THAT expense on any Income statement for example Apple or HP ?

If I find it in any annual report, what do I win?

You really don't believe that the expenses for acquiring a factory overseas, training workers in a foreign country, or severing US employees are tax deductable?

I am certain they are.

39   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 5, 4:50pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

If I find it in any annual report, what do I win?

You really don't believe that the expenses for acquiring a factory overseas, training workers in a foreign country, or severing US employees are tax deductable?

I am certain they are.

No.. there is no training, no cost sharing or equity position. You turn off production in the US. And start receiving from your vendor the finished goods as if they were any other vendor sending/billing goods to you.

there are no overseas plants... for example, tech companies shed their mfg plants decades ago... they have no direct cost burdens.. they are strickly in "engineering, marketing, and selling" game..

Who in Apple is going to train anyone to do anything in Foxx or Asus (Taiwan).
Apple closed it last domestic operations 20 years ago... even Apple doesnt have the skill sets anymore...
Making a laptop or iphone.. after all all the parts are engineered and mfg overseas for the past decade..

40   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 5, 5:12pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

Depletion accounting exists to compensate the owner for the lost value of his land. If the oil company does not own the land, it should not deduct the depletion value. But since the oil company has leased the rights to the land, they are allowed to deplete the value of those leasehold rights. They can book the value of those leasehold rights at many times what they pay for them to maximize the depletion deduction.

No, its not compensation to anyone, its a non-cash expense spread over years of production to the oil company just like depreciation for fixed assets except depletion covers oil, mining and forestry.
Spreading the cost across production years and thus matching revenues and expenses. No different than the cost to building a factory and depreciation it during the course of operations on units sold. Therefore they become product costs through absorption accounting. It makes no difference if land is leased or owned since land isnt depreciated.

Frankly its no different than the IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) by foreign companies.

I dont know why the Liberals have taken something so ridiculous like depletion and demonized it. Another example of distraction and government wasting its time. Obama's comments to take that 'subsidy' away is nonsense!

41   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 5, 11:01pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

No, its not compensation to anyone, its a non-cash expense spread over years of production to the oil company just like depreciation for fixed assets except depletion covers oil, mining and forestry.

Obviously - the tax break is the compensation.

You say nothing of double counting the deduction though, especially on government lands...

42   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 5, 11:04pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

there are no overseas plants... for example, tech companies shed their mfg plants decades ago... they have no direct cost burdens.. they are strickly in "engineering, marketing, and selling" game..

You are only using a very narrow view of the manufacturing overseas...
€
are you telling me that NO American firm owns and operates an overseas firm?

What about Tech support? I can tell you with 100% confidence because I happen to work for a company who has moved tech support overseas.

We trained the employees. We built out a facility. We shipped equipment there. It has happened at least once then.

We deducted every one of those expenses.

43   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 6, 12:30pm     ↓ dislike (3)   quote   flag        

david1 says

are you telling me that NO American firm owns and operates an overseas firm?

Certainly many dont any longer.. you will be hard pressed to find SV companies actually calling themself a manufacture or owning any mfg factory overseas.. be it Apple, HP, Dell, Juniper, IBM, Cisco and many many others. The closest you can come to this are the OEMs...

The OEMs are Selectron, Flextronics, SCI, and others who actual make these products to be sold. They have plants in US and other countries. Walk into any one of their plants and you will find production for several branded US companies. None are controlled or owned by their customers. That is why they call it Outsourced.

Are you going to go after dozen of these OEMs who serve 1000 of US companies and bankrupt them ?

Tech support isnt manufacturing..

There is certainly plenty of overseas SW development going on by US companies.. Oracle, Microsoft, Dell, IBM etc etc.

44   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 6, 12:43pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

david1 says

We deducted every one of those expenses.

You want to solve the problem.. deal with the issue instead of skirting it.

We been dealing with this issues since the late 80s. What do you do when your foreign competition drops their selling price BELOW their own cost of production, in order to take market share from you causing perpetual price deflation... AND your liberal government clamps down on both EPA and Labor regulations, introducing fees , penalties and higher taxes.

Its no wonder the reaction would be selling plants to 3rd parties, outsourcing jobs. Its happened to Semis, PC, Networking, and many others industries.

I certainly dont like what has happened, but we havent even coming close to talking about real solutions when it comes to manufacturing.

I sure dont know how you or Obama would treat Fords Opal division in Europe.. do you disallow deduction for production expenses.. labor, matl, overhead ... since its all euro workers serve their euro customers.

45   thomaswong.1986   ignore (5)   2012 Oct 6, 1:00pm     ↓ dislike (2)   quote   flag        

david1 says

You say nothing of double counting the deduction though, especially on government lands...

explain the double counting ? you paid once for the labor, materials, and overhead accumulated costs to get the oil rig into production and spreading that costs matching against the revenue. How different is that again from depreciation of a manufactured building or capitalized software development costs or even Goodwill amortization ?

Besides.. the oil companies get no subsidy or any payments from the govt. How much have they been getting in cash from the Govt.. any amount you can find in the US FED budget ?

46   david1   ignore (1)   2012 Oct 6, 11:58pm     ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

thomaswong.1986 says

You want to solve the problem.. deal with the issue instead of skirting it.

Don't obfuscate the discussion. This discussion started when I mentioned Romney stretching the truth in the debte. You mentioned two specific items that Obama used during the debate and I disputed:

1. Tax Deduction of expenses for shipping jobs overseas. I (nor Obama) was not specific to manufacturing. I have proven that this is a true statement by Obama, giving examples of how companies could do so.

2. Depletion accounting

« First    « Previous    Comments 7 - 46 of 46    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions