Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Why did Obama Win?  
User currently offlinepu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 697 posts, RR: 13
Posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1336 times:

It seems to me the ECONOMY was not the decisive issue as commonly believed: all the polls I saw said Romney was trusted more on economics.

Two things stick out to me about what Republicans may have did wrong:

(1) TACTICALLY, not facing reality and instead arguing the polls were flawed when they could have made a game-changing campaign adjustment, and,

(2) STRATEGICALLY, arguing for the importance of the Benghazi attack, repudiating Obamacare and increasing defense spending and other ideas which aren't big vote-getting ideas for swing moderate voters, but appeal to Republicans

Thoughts?


I really hope America gets its fiscal house in order and do wish the great American people a successful future!


Pu

243 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7577 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1342 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
(1) TACTICALLY, not facing reality and instead arguing the polls were flawed when they could have made a game-changing campaign adjustment, and,

Tactically- Focusing on pushing Obama in a wall where Obama has failed, such as in Nevada and Ohio, where populations are still out of work in large numbers,

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
(2) STRATEGICALLY, arguing for the importance of the Benghazi attack, repudiating Obamacare and increasing defense spending and other ideas which aren't big vote-getting ideas for swing moderate voters, but appeal to Republicans

EXACTLY. In all seriousness, Romney was NOT persuasive enough.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinemhkansan From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 684 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1339 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 1):
EXACTLY. In all seriousness, Romney was NOT persuasive enough.

It may have helped if he had actually had a platform both the candidate and the running mate could support. Romney/Ryan were both supporting a RNC platform that neither one of them personally believed them, and would say anything to any audience to get elected.

If this election proved anything, it's that deceit can't get you elected to the highest office of the land. Obama may not have had the greatest first term, but at least he had something people could sympathize with and a record to prove it. Romney had a record but he didn't endorse it as his own!

Case in point: Romneycare.

I'm personally impressed so many thought this would be a close election. It really shouldn't have been. Why support a guy who can't remember what's on his website?


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
Two things stick out to me about what Republicans may have did wrong:

They had the wrong guy. Obama didn't win as much as Romney lost.

The real issue is where do they go from here. I think they have two years to find their man, and launch a long campaign. I'd pick Huntsman as my early favorite, if he's up to it, but they need a candidate and fast. Everybody knew from about 2004 on that Obama was going to be the guy in 2008, with even Hillary being only a brief, fringe contender. And the guy has to be strong economically, and moderate on everything else. The economy is where the Republicans had a chance to win this time and where they'll have a chance to win next time.

As they look for their man and after they find him, they need to launch an all out war. The Republicans need to grow the teeth that up until now only the Tea Party has had and blast the economic failures of the Democrats and general idiocy of the Tea Party. It's at four years and counting, so there's plenty there. They need to compile a resume of economic failure.

And, above all, stop listening to the Tea Partiers. They aren't going anywhere, so there's no reason to pander to them or be scared of them. Republicans need to drop social issues entirely and focus on their strength, which is the economy.

The economic troubles left the Republicans a hanging curveball just begging to get whacked. But they swung and missed and are now faced with four years of damage control, during which time they should spend as much time as possible on the offensive.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinejakeorion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1253 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

Romney did not give clear cut answers nor details on his policies; too focused on bashing the President while refusing to acknowledge this has been a disaster in the making over several Presidencies; too focused on social issues; picked by stupid establishment Republicans after their own greed and power rather than addressing the wounds America.

Romney was a DOA as soon as the establishment picked him. Never wanted to vote for him, as I knew it was not going to do any good.



Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7175 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

Why Obama won. You want the real reason?

Hispanic Vote, Gender Gap.
That is all, that is the reason. This country is changing demographically if the Miitt who ran for govenours could get through the GOP primary he would have won this election. The hard right of the GOP is what needs to change.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 5):
Hispanic Vote, Gender Gap.

I'd add a highly sophisticated "get out the vote" program in the most strategic areas. If anything, the Obama campaign knew where their voters were, and got them to the polls.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13208 posts, RR: 77
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1339 times:

The news is saying that women, younger women, younger single ones especially, really turned out to vote.
If so, will the GOP let up on this obsession with not just female reproductive rights, but from some of them, even contraception?
Easy to say, harder to convince enough of their base?

Seems odd when the economy is seen to be THE issue of course but could this biggest of all the 'culture wars' just been enough?

Then there has been the attitude towards the growing Hispanic population from some of the GOP, quite apart from the demographics involved, there is a pretty solid law in democracies everywhere, if a party gives the impression it does not like or approve of parts of a population, they won't win.
Because all those minorities can add up.

[Edited 2012-11-06 21:51:43]

User currently offlineflyingturtle From Switzerland, joined Oct 2011, 2411 posts, RR: 13
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1340 times:

He got the unconditional support of 47% of the Americans. That's why, dear gentlemen and gentlewomen. 


David



Keeping calm is terrorism against those who want to live in fear.
User currently offlinePHX787 From Japan, joined Mar 2012, 7577 posts, RR: 18
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
I'd add a highly sophisticated "get out the vote" program in the most strategic areas. If anything, the Obama campaign knew where their voters were, and got them to the polls.

MANY Ron Paul supporters did NOT vote for Romney. or O.



次は、渋谷、渋谷。出口は、右側です。電車とホームの間は広く開いておりますので、足元に注意下さい。
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12476 posts, RR: 37
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

I think it was an issue of personality at the end of the day; Romney was simply not likeable; Huckabee got it right when he said that Romney looks like the guy who fires you. Obama was by far the more personable, empathatic and likeable of the two.

User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

If you look at Ohio (and other industrial states) I think the reason is Obama's support for the auto industry and Romney's lack of support. Obama took a lot of heat at the time, but it was the right decision.

As much as opponents trashed ObamaCare the reality is they everyone who has a member of their family with a "pre-existing condition" knows it was a critical reform. Also, anyone who understands that a big chunk of their health insurance premium is to cover those who cannot pay will consider the mandate to be a step forward. Maybe large employers will start putting pressure on all politicians to get the burden of nanny care off of their backs and move it to a tax related to income.

I also believe that Romney's tax plans were too obscure on what the middle class would loose in terms of deductions. Those voters had to vote on a hope for fair treatment. The hard core Republicans did just that, but obviously a lot of independents.

And, in the end, Romney didn't disclose enough of himself and that hurt. The missing years of tax returns hurt. Doesn't matter what the "minimum requirements" are - he was burned.

And the War on Women hurt. Not just Life -v- Choice, but all the weird things, like the vaginal probes and legitimate rape.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1338 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
They had the wrong guy. Obama didn't win as much as Romney lost.

No, you see, that's where you're wrong.

I would have agreed with you if every battleground state hadn't gone to Obama. I might even agree with you if Florida hadn't upheld Obamacare. I might agree with you if 4/4 states hadn't voted for equal rights. The only thing the GOP won tonight was retaining control of the house... and some of the Teapublicans got canned at that. If my own prediction of a 290 vote squeaker had been correct, I'd agree with you. If the GOP had taken the Senate or gained a significant number of seats in the house (it looks like they might have lost a few seats while retaining control). I might agree if the popular vote hadn't gone solidly to Obama (at this time, most of the red states are done reporting, but the Western blue states are just warming up and yet Obama is ahead).

See, the GOP's mistake was that they thought that Americans were stupid enough to fall for their sabotage trick. Boehner said it up front: they were going to sabotage the economy to make Obama lose. That was #1 priority. Not jobs, not economy, but beating Obama. And Americans saw through it.

Tonight was a strong message to the GOP that this isn't going to win them elections. They need to start putting America before the GOP. It was also a strong message to Obama that we like his views. We like his social views and we like his economic policies.

The GOP now has two choices: 1) Continue their current course and put party before country or 2) put America first and start negotiating.

If they choose option (1), they will find that they are rapidly becoming irrelevant and that they will be replaced by the Libertarian party or that another party will replace them. This is an increasingly diverse nation and they need to face it.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1350 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
Not jobs, not economy, but beating Obama. And Americans saw through it.

The joke is probably on Americans, if the plan is four more years of expensive yet largely ineffectual economic measures.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
If they choose option (1), they will find that they are rapidly becoming irrelevant and that they will be replaced by the Libertarian party or that another party will replace them. This is an increasingly diverse nation and they need to face it.

That won't happen. They just need to 1) stop being scared of the Tea Party and 2) find someone brown for the next election. A vagina would help too, as long as it doesn't belong to Sarah Palin. They need to come out firing on economic issues, forget about social issues, and pander to minorities.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6664 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1343 times:

I'm an optimist so I think that in four years the global economy will be booming ; if the GOP wants to win then, the economy won't be it.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
The joke is probably on Americans, if the plan is four more years of expensive yet largely ineffectual economic measures.

Over three years of non-stop job growth is not ineffectual. And that's in spite of the GOP, not because of it.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
They just need to 1) stop being scared of the Tea Party

OMG we agree on something.   

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
2) find someone brown for the next election.

Nope. Not so simple. I guarantee you that the people who voted for Obama with race as a factor weren't going to vote for Herman Cain, either.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
A vagina would help too, as long as it doesn't belong to Sarah Palin.

The problem is bigger than Palin. There are a lot of GOP women saying outrageous things up to and including opposition to women's suffrage. And that is a very odd thing to hear from a woman politician, I have to say. Again, color and ovaries don't get you elected.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
They need to come out firing on economic issues, forget about social issues,

If they have a sensible economic plan --which they haven't so far-- and drop the "kick the gays/ban contraception/treat abortion lime murder" thing, they might actually be able to do well.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1344 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 14):
I'm an optimist so I think that in four years the global economy will be booming ;

If people keep supporting leftist economic policies, I don't think we'll have to worry about that.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1342 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
The joke is probably on Americans, if the plan is four more years of expensive yet largely ineffectual economic measures.

THe GOP needs to start listening to those in the party who see victory in the middle. Built on a stronger middle class, intelligent government programs and moderation. The wild eyed hard right clearly lost today.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
They just need to 1) stop being scared of the Tea Party

That won't happen for another few elections. Can the Tea Party be bitch slapped out of the halls of power before the 2014 election? Probably not, but it would be a major first step in bringing the GOP back to the White House.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 13):
and 2) find someone brown for the next election.

They don't have to a person of color - any color. But the GOP needs to embrace non-whites as strongly as the Democrats. I believe that will take a few more election failures and a lot more old grey men with a $2 haircut to leave politics. Fortunately there is an increasing minority of non-whites building to an eventual majority. As we approach that point there will be some in the GOP who will see the need to adjust. Steve Schmit is already talking about that.

So the GOP will adjust, or it will shrink to nothing but a bunch of TPers.


User currently offlinestratosphere From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1653 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting jakeorion (Reply 4):
Romney was a DOA as soon as the establishment picked him. Never wanted to vote for him, as I knew it was not going to do any good.

Exactly!! If the GOP had put up ANYBODY worthwhile Obama would have never won a second term. Myself included my vote was a vote against Obama more than it was a vote for Romney and I haven't voted since 1984. But its not racial. In fact I as a person like Obama over Romney. I just hate Obamas appointments. I despise Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano. Well he won so will be interesting to see how the next 4 years plays out.



NWA THE TRUE EVIL EMPIRE
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1345 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Over three years of non-stop job growth is not ineffectual. And that's in spite of the GOP, not because of it.

And yet the economy is still struggling. And the government is planning to cut defense and increase taxes. It hasn't worked, just like it didn't work in the Great Depression.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
I guarantee you that the people who voted for Obama with race as a factor weren't going to vote for Herman Cain, either.

I think you'd be surprised. Many Latinos are Catholic and many blacks are socially conservative and are only Democrats because they perceive the Republicans to be racist. The right doesn't need to be strong on social issues, just more conservative than the Democrats.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
They don't have to a person of color - any color.

Actually at this point it would probably work well enough.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecaliatenza From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1577 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 1340 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):

I fail to see your argument when the statistics clearly show the economy is improving. Yes, maybe slowly, but its headed in the right direction.


User currently offlinepu From Sweden, joined Dec 2011, 697 posts, RR: 13
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1340 times:

Quoting stratosphere (Reply 18):

Exactly!! If the GOP had put up ANYBODY worthwhile Obama would have never won a second term.

I don't think so. None of the other GOP early entrants would have done better, IMO , and several would have done a lot worse, especially Rick Perry.

Romney was a strong candidate for Repbulicans. He is a smart guy, well spoken. Who wouldn't want him to manage their investments? I think its the Republican platform that is failing.

With the economy in slow gear and the incumbent STILL wins, even though Romney clearly has a different economic agenda, it seems to me the Democrats in a normal economy have nothing to worry about....because even in an abnormal economy like this they're strong enough to win.

I bet a mere 1 percentage point improvement in unemployment would have made Obama unbeatable...the demographics are now squarely in favour of the Democrats, even in weak economies.


Pu


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1346 times:

Quoting caliatenza (Reply 20):
Yes, maybe slowly, but its headed in the right direction.

The growth is barely keeping up with what's needed to keep unemployment from growing, if that. And growth based on stimulus goes away when the stimulus does. That's why the economy under Clinton was that good: it was actual growth, even if there was a bubble on top of it. You could wipe out unemployment by hiring people to make sculptures, but then the sculptures are made, the people have nothing to do anymore, and you have to find tax revenue to pay for the people you paid to make the sculptures.

And a tax hike has never helped growth in the economy. The economy might grow in spite of tax increases, but not because of them. Increasing taxes in a weak economy is just a bad idea.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinecaliatenza From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1577 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1341 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 22):

Well Obama said he wants to go with Clinton era economics. I seem to recall that the rich did just fine with the Clinton era tax rates


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1348 times:

Quoting caliatenza (Reply 23):
Well Obama said he wants to go with Clinton era economics.

Who wouldn't? Bring back the tech boom and you can bring back those tax rates. Until then, it's not a wise thing to do.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10898 posts, RR: 37
Reply 25, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1545 times:

The average voter knows little or nothing about policies or economics. They are way beyond their mind frame.

What made Obama win is his immense popularity. The huge support he gets from the media, TV ads, newspapers, his Hollywood, show biz and celeb friends who supported him with huge financial donations to his campaign and asked their fans to vote for him and with whom the average voters like to identify with. Also popular measures such as "Obamaphones".

For the average voter Obama projects the image of a hero, a role model, they love him, they love his fashionista wife Michelle, his daughters, the dog, the public images he conveys. They all see him a really nice guy. They did not want to lose that so they voted for him again.

Other than that the average voters don't have any idea of Obama's politics and whatever policies he intends to apply during his second term domestically, even less outside of the US.

  

[Edited 2012-11-07 00:26:54]


There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6664 posts, RR: 11
Reply 26, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1539 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 25):
What made Obama win is the huge media support he gets, TV ads, newspapers, his Hollywood, show biz and celeb friends who supported him financially

Romney had plenty of media support. As for the show biz, why do they overwhelmingly support Obama ? There must be a reason, especially considering he intends to tax them more.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10898 posts, RR: 37
Reply 27, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1564 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 26):
Romney had plenty of media support.

Obama conveys a highly popular image, especially among women "I am the people's friend".
Romney didn't.

Romney was seen as the rich people's candidate who would have cut down on the "nanny state" therefore unpopular with the masses. A majority of people really like the idea of a "nanny state".

Also most people voted Obama simply because they knew what to expect from him, good or bad. They had no idea what Romney in the White House would be about so they did not want to run the risk and they voted Obama in for a second term.

 

[Edited 2012-11-07 00:52:47]


There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 28, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 1560 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 27):
Romney was seen as the rich people's candidate who would have cut down on the "nanny state" therefore unpopular with the masses. A majority of people really like the idea of a "nanny state".

Romney was seen as rich and out of touch. He was seen as downright weird. A lot of people simply don't trust his religion. He seemed to switch positions from day to day to suit the current climate. A man is entitled to disagree with himself, but to claim that this is what he thought all along when clearly he didn't is another thing entirely.

The tax returns can't have helped because they demonstrated with a Romney White House would have been like. Opaque as...well... a black binder full of women.   And then there was his way with words... or lack thereof.

And finally, there was his lack of ideas. He sat up there and blithely claimed that there was nothing wrong with the healthcare system. That the ambulance was socialized medicine. That nobody died because of lack of insurance. That's so silly it's literally insulting. You don't earn votes that way.

That's' why he lost.


User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8507 posts, RR: 12
Reply 29, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 1544 times:

Quoting PHX787 (Reply 9):
MANY Ron Paul supporters did NOT vote for Romney. or O.

I voted for Ron Paul. Although I was tempted to write in Nick Saban's name instead...   


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 30, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 1546 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
arguing for the importance of the Benghazi attack

To me, that was waaaay over-done. The GOP spent a lot of time and energy on it and they ended up looking like opportunists instead of leaders.

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
Thoughts?

A lot of people who argued against polls and their methodologies must feel silly today.

It really is about the candidate. Romney won the primary because he spend a lot of his own money and because he was able to appeal to others who had a lot of money. All of this didn't cover up the fact that he had little appeal as a candidate.

Romney's main selling point was that he was a successful businessman, but it's hard to see how one's skills as a vulture capitalist translate well into becoming President. We didn't know anything about Bain Capital before the race, it all came out in dribs and drabs based on things the Dems published, and Romney's side was always on the defensive about it.

Social conservatives can't be happy about an openly gay senator and two states legalizing recreational use of marijuana.

Quoting mhkansan (Reply 2):
Romney/Ryan were both supporting a RNC platform that neither one of them personally believed them, and would say anything to any audience to get elected.

It didn't help Romney to not fully endorse Ryan's plan right after he picked Ryan as a running mate.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
The Republicans need to grow the teeth that up until now only the Tea Party has had and blast the economic failures of the Democrats and general idiocy of the Tea Party.

I think the country is sick of their belligerence. They need to represent their view constructively, and use their control of the House to reach compromise with the Senate.

Quoting kaitak (Reply 10):
Romney was simply not likeable;

  

As above, it is about the candidate.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 11):
As much as opponents trashed ObamaCare the reality is they everyone who has a member of their family with a "pre-existing condition" knows it was a critical reform.

One even Romney was trying to find a way to embrace.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 11):
And the War on Women hurt. Not just Life -v- Choice, but all the weird things, like the vaginal probes and legitimate rape.

Indeed. I think the GOP has a huge problem there. Their "every sperm is sacred" position is just so hard to defend, and when they do, they paint themselves into the "legitimate rape" corner, which then attracts the truly ignorant who feel that "women have a way to shut that thing down".

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
the GOP's mistake was that they thought that Americans were stupid enough to fall for their sabotage trick.

I agree - that tactic was a big part of why much of the country did not want to see the GOP in the White House.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 12):
We like his social views and we like his economic policies.

Personally, I didn't like the stimulus, and I hope fiscal issues get a lot more attention.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
The wild eyed hard right clearly lost today.

Perhaps, but that's the source of a lot of the enthusiasm in the GOP.

If it becomes all about the Rockefeller Republicans, how are they going to keep the base happy?

The wild-eyed stuff is what keeps ratings high for Rush and for FOX, and keeps the base engaged.

They want to cling to their guns and their religion, not read stock market reports.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 31, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1517 times:

Ok, how about some interesting input from journalists?

The strategy that paved a winning path

Obama's team discussed nailing Romney as a flip-flopper, but the data pointed to a stronger hand:

Quote:

“The most striking data we saw early on was on the ‘understands problems of people like me’ question,” said a senior White House official involved in the discussions. “Into the summer, Romney was in the teens in this category.”

The choice was made. The onetime campaign of hope and change soon began a sustained advertising assault that cast Romney as a heartless executive, a man who willingly fires people and is disconnected from how average Americans live their lives — an approach reinforced by Romney’s mistakes along the way.

Even Romney's side admits:

Quote:

Another Romney adviser said: “The group think today is if we were to go back and change one thing, we’d spend more money and more strongly defend Mitt and push back on the ‘rich guy,’ the tax rate issue, the Bain Capital issue. We knew it was coming and we should’ve done more positive ads to get his favorables up.”

But was it about more ads? I kinda doubt it. Romney himself seemed to just not want to stand up to his past, he seemed to prefer to hide it.

Romney himself put his business background into the foreground, and when it was time to speak to it, he just couldn't make the case that leading Bain Capital would make him a good President.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineVenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 32, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1523 times:

This Benghazi thing has just started and Staten Island , Long Island, Jersey are a mess. Second terms are underwelming. Look for Marco Rubio or Christie dipping their toes in the water in 2016. I would like John Huntsman if he can win a primary and have the hard core conservatives relize that they cant win with a hard liner. The country is changing from a hard working middle class type guys to winey Starbuck sipping guys mad because they can't get a job with their art degree. Mitts 47% will be at over 50% when 2016 comes around. I will be 54 in 2016 and I think the hard working guy does not stand a chance. What next for the poor welfare class in the urban areas, how will they bribed to vote, I know free t shirts and hats for everyone just like Hugo Chavez does. I wonder if small business owners and corporations will still sit on their money, its good that we have split congress now.


I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 33, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1515 times:

Quoting Venus6971 (Reply 32):
The country is changing from a hard working middle class type guys to winey Starbuck sipping guys mad because they can't get a job with their art degree. Mitts 47% will be at over 50% when 2016 comes around. I will be 54 in 2016 and I think the hard working guy does not stand a chance.

What you seem to be saying is your generation did a piss poor job of raising kids.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinedanfearn77 From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2008, 1813 posts, RR: 8
Reply 34, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1519 times:

Obama is FAR more likeable and I'm very glad he has won. I'm not exaggerating when I say everyone I spoke to about it here in the UK wanted Obama to win. Friends, family, girlfriend, my girlfriends family, my work colleagues, everyone. I didn't come across a single person who wanted Romney as president. Obama is more charismatic, more outgoing and more assertive it seems. I think he'll command more respect abroad than Romney. I also got the impression Romney would have been a little 'trigger happy' with the Middle East had he gotten in?


Eagles may soar high, but weasels dont get sucked into jet engines!
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 35, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1513 times:

Quoting danfearn77 (Reply 34):
I also got the impression Romney would have been a little 'trigger happy' with the Middle East had he gotten in?

Like most things, Romney wasn't saying what he'd do once he got in, but I had my concerns in this area, especially with all the former GWB people he had advising him.

Obama got a lot of applause when he mentioned the end of wars in his acceptance speech.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinecsavel From United States of America, joined Jan 2001, 1363 posts, RR: 4
Reply 36, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1516 times:

I think Obama won because of the following (a lot of which has already been mentioned)

1) Right wing tea party American Taliban turned off a whole bunch of fiscally conservative voters.
2) The "legitimate rape" comments didn't help either
3) People are actually smart enough to know that a president, ANY president can't wave a magic wand and fix a broken economy. As much as I am nervous about even more debt from the stimulus, I, and most other Americans remember how Clinton had a surplus. Bush decided on large tax breaks when the US is already low taxed compared to oterh industrialized countries PLUS he decided to piss away billions of dollars (not to mention a lot of lives!) in a war of choice in Iraq, and he gave a blank check to military contractors. Both the Dems and Republicans can take credit for lax oversight that led to the bursting of the housing bubble. Frankly, I think it will take a decade until the effects of that are wrung out of the economy - no matter who is president.
To wit, just because Obama hasn't "fixed" the economy, most Americans percieve that the republicans broke it and that nobody can fix it all that easily. The Republicans assumed that American were stupid enough not to remember 2007!
4) continuing on 3, Romeny's combination of tax cuts and increased military spending that would balance the budget was magical thinking. Everyone knew it, even conservative economists.
5) The "etch-a-sketch" thing. Obama care is basically Romneycare writ large. There could be very legitimate reasons why Romney thought the Massachusetts model wouldn't scale up. Romney could have had legit reasons on why he no longer believed in Romneycare. But he never gave a valid reason why. Result: Most people thought he was even more of a mercenary panderer who would say anything to win an election than other politicians. That. Hurt. Him. Deeply.

So tl:dr, most Americans IMHO
Liked Obama
Weren't thrilled with his economic performance, but
Didn't buy Romney's numbers
Didn't trust the Republicans to fix it either
Didn't trust Romney because of his shifting opinions
Obama did a good job of painting Romney as rich and out-of-touch
Tea party and "Independent" attack ads made the Republican brand seem like the KKK brand.

The above was a big one. How many fiscally conservative, libertarian leaning votes did the Republicans lose because of the "birther","You lie!", "doesn't know what it means to be an American", "legitimate rape", "A secret Muslim", "where's the birth certificate" stuff? In my immediate family, I know four. Four lost votes that the Republicans could've had. Note that gay marriage passed in two, probably 3 states, and a lot of the more extreme republican house candidates got their asses handed to them. (Even Michelle Bachman won in a squeaker, and who knows, once all the ballots are counted it could turn the other way.)

Message to the Repubs, throw out the American Taliban from the party entirely, fight for freedom for your bedrooms, wombs, and marriages like you say you fight for your economic freedom. Then we can talk.



I may be ugly. I may be an American. But don't call me an ugly American.
User currently offlinejamincan From Canada, joined Aug 2006, 775 posts, RR: 0
Reply 37, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1508 times:

For me, Romney seemed to be someone who would be more interested in how he could help himself and his friends. I found him completely and utterly slimy and loathsome. Not that it means anything as a Canadian.

User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 38, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1515 times:

Quoting pu (Reply 21):
it seems to me the Democrats in a normal economy have nothing to worry about....because even in an abnormal economy like this they're strong enough to win.

53% of Americans still blame the economy on Bush. This is an abnormal situation. I wouldn't count on it as the norm going forward that the Dems can count on in future.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlinebristolflyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 2297 posts, RR: 0
Reply 39, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1511 times:

Romney definitely lost it - the guy was not appropriate to run the country. Remember what happened las time he went abroad? P!ssed off all 3 countries he went to. He and hence the US) would have been a laughing stock on the national stage.


Fortune favours the brave
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 40, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 1513 times:

Quoting csavel (Reply 36):
3) People are actually smart enough to know that a president, ANY president can't wave a magic wand and fix a broken economy.

And the two corollaries:
3a) Romney never explained how a 1%er vulture capitalist like himself was going to be able to fix things either, and
3b) It was many of the GOP policies like less regulation that lead us right into the Great Financial Crisis to begin with

Time for you to head back to Belmont MA, Mitt. Or was that La Jolla, CA? Or Squam Lake, NH? Somewhere where you can hang with your 1%ers and bitch about the 47%.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7175 posts, RR: 9
Reply 41, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1513 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 11):
If you look at Ohio (and other industrial states) I think the reason is Obama's support for the auto industry and

I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
Over three years of non-stop job growth is not ineffectual. And that's in spite of the GOP, not because of it.

Job Growth? Sure we are gaining jobs but NOT enough for population growth. The job market is weak. It is hard to find jobs for free for students. The job market sucks. There are very few jobs out there and unemployment is 0.1% higher today than it was when Obama took office. How that is job growth is beyond me.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
THe GOP needs to start listening to those in the party who see victory in the middle. Built on a stronger middle class, intelligent government programs and moderation. The wild eyed hard right clearly lost today.

Agreed. Most Americans want a smaller government, most Americans also to not want taxes raised. Yet most Americans voted for Obama. How I am not sure. I guess they think other issues are more important like Social Issues. I think what killed the GOP here is the primary process. Too many debates, and for a good candidate like Romney to get out of the party he needs to be way too much to the right. The "real" Romney from being GOV in Mass would have had a much better chance at winning this thing. The GOP needs to go more in the center for social issues, get away from religion and politics and just focus on the government. This country is still a Center Right country, the problem is the base of the GOP is too far right.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 42, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1502 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

If Ohio had been the deciding factor, maybe that would be true, but Florida and Va are the real stories.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):

Job Growth? Sure we are gaining jobs but NOT enough for population growth. The job market is weak. It is hard to find jobs for free for students. The job market sucks. There are very few jobs out there and unemployment is 0.1% higher today than it was when Obama took office. How that is job growth is beyond me.

The job market is shaping up. A lot of the uncertainty about the Affordable care act is over. Housing is recovering The ROW is the big problem right now. Jobs will come ,and they will come fast if housing keeps up the gains,

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
Thoughts?

The economy was a big factor,but I think the GOP overplayed their hand on this. Exit pols yesterday showed that the majority still held the previous administration responsible for the hole we are digging out of. Will that change in the next few years? Perhaps, but it doesn't matter, Obama can't run again.

At the end of the day ,I think the GOP put too much effort into their Rural White base, and it came back to bite them, birtherism, welfare, immigration. These issues along with some of the women's issues hurt them.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 43, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1507 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):

I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Translation: Obama doing his job well might have won Obama this race.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
Most Americans want a smaller government

This is where Republicans are wrong. Most Americans want a smaller government... for other people.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
most Americans also to not want taxes raised.

And most Americans will not see their taxes raised, just as no American has seen his taxes raised in Obama's first term.

Obama won this election because Americans think he did a fairly good job with a bad hand, and see the alternative as playing them for fools. Tell enough lies and hope one sticks.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
The GOP needs to go more in the center for social issues, get away from religion and politics and just focus on the government.

This is correct and a half!

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
This country is still a Center Right country

No, it really isn't, and this election should prove it to you. If the GOP wants to be relevant into the future, it has to stop believing this.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
I think what killed the GOP here is the primary process.

Absolutely right. You and I will always agree on this point.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinevoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 44, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 4 days ago) and read 1497 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
This country is still a Center Right country, the problem is the base of the GOP is too far right.

True-ish but that may assume an obsolescent definition of the political spectrum.
IMHO: Compared to most 21st-century Western countries political spectrums, it is Obama who is occupying 'Center Right'. If the Dems continue to 'Occupy CR' (see what I did there?) then the Republican Party will probably fracture or, at least, severely convulse, until something befalls the Dems and they lose concentration. See: UK Labour vs. Conservative Party 1997-2010. The GOP cannot 'occupy' where they want, when they want. It's 'No Vacancy' at the moment.



[Edited 2012-11-07 06:30:55]


` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 45, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1501 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Obama won this election because Americans think he did a fairly good job with a bad hand, and see the alternative as playing them for fools.

Pretty much the way I see it as well. Looking back to where we were in 2008 with the world swiftly collapsing economically, Obama is generally seen as not making things worse since then, and not having a hand in creating that crisis, so "blame" was hard to place on the current administration. I think most people understood there wasn't an overnight solution, which is why he was able to be re-elected with a 7.9% unemployment rate.

Last night's voting was incredibly interesting. Ohio, Florida and Virginia have now been mostly marginalized as electorally important. Heck, in Florida they even stopped counting votes in the middle of the night.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineInsideMan From Vatican City, joined Aug 2011, 213 posts, RR: 0
Reply 46, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1497 times:

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 27):
Romney was seen as the rich people's candidate who would have cut down on the "nanny state" therefore unpopular with the masses. A majority of people really like the idea of a "nanny state".

There's lots of room between a nanny state and leaving everyone alone in their mess, no matter what. There are some things Americans can only do together and I think "Sandy" was a good reminder why you need a strong (not big) government to help the people.

Besides, the economy alone would have been enough for the GOP to win, but they lost on social issues. It's time for the GOP to move on to the 21st century. Gay marriage, DADT, a womans right to chose, immigration, health care .....
Their stand on these issues alienates voters and quite frankly doesn't make them trust on economic issues either.


User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1491 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 5):
Why Obama won. You want the real reason?

Obama managed to convince his base that the economy wasn't his fault and they believed him. Despite virtually every major economic indicator being worse than when he took office.

From Romney's side the Evangelicals stayed home.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 48, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1507 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
WHY Obama Won?

'cause of Dubya's support:

George Bush Accidently Votes For Obama

The man really can't catch a break...



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1264 posts, RR: 3
Reply 49, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1483 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 47):
Obama managed to convince his base that the economy wasn't his fault and they believed him. Despite virtually every major economic indicator being worse than when he took office.

It isn't his fault, these economic crisis are worldwide and one man can't magically make everything better when rest of the world is mostly going worse. Educated part of US population understands that and voted for Obama, other than those who had a lot of money and thus voted for Romney as his politics would have benefited rich people.



"A rational army would run away"
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7175 posts, RR: 9
Reply 50, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1487 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 48):
'cause of Dubya's support:

George Bush Accidently Votes For Obama

The man really can't catch a break...

Can't tell you know this is a fake news website or not.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4503 posts, RR: 15
Reply 51, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1477 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 6):
I'd add a highly sophisticated "get out the vote" program in the most strategic areas. If anything, the Obama campaign knew where their voters were, and got them to the polls.

I'd agree with this. A large part of the reason Obama won was because they still had most of the info of the 2008 voters, knew how to contact them, bussed them to polls, and had far more field offices per capita than the Romney campaign. Their GOTV machine worked very well this time around, just as it did in 2008, and will likely be the model for future campaigns, both Republican and Democrat.

I also feel that the Republicans' social agenda is hurting them. The only way they're going to start winning elections again is if they dump the tea party and return to moderation.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 52, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1453 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Or a wise plan that saves tax dollars in the long run may have won Obama this race!  
Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Translation: Obama doing his job well might have won Obama this race.

  

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Obama won this election because Americans think he did a fairly good job with a bad hand, and see the alternative as playing them for fools.

That's the down side of being "The Party of NO" - it's hard to convince anyone that you would do anything constructive should you gain power.

Quoting InsideMan (Reply 46):
There are some things Americans can only do together and I think "Sandy" was a good reminder why you need a strong (not big) government to help the people.

As opposed to GWB's abandonment of New Orleans. The image of him "surveying damage" from AF1 created many anti-GWBers that day. I suppose GWB had all of New Orleans in the 47% category so he didn't bother landing AF1.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 53, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1455 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 50):
Can't tell you know this is a fake news website or not.

I thought it was obvious, but still included the    smiley to make it even clearer.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 54, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1458 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 51):
I also feel that the Republicans' social agenda is hurting them. The only way they're going to start winning elections again is if they dump the tea party and return to moderation.

Just read an interesting statistic — the last time a Republican won a presidential election without a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket was 1928 when Herbert Hoover was elected.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineSTT757 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 16872 posts, RR: 51
Reply 55, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1462 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
It seems to me the ECONOMY was not the decisive issue as commonly believed:

The economy was a factor, however exit polling showed the majority of voters blamed former President Bush for the current state of the economy. The posters below sum up the economy issue best;

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
53% of Americans still blame the economy on Bush
Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Obama won this election because Americans think he did a fairly good job with a bad hand,
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 45):
Pretty much the way I see it as well. Looking back to where we were in 2008 with the world swiftly collapsing economically, Obama is generally seen as not making things worse since then, and not having a hand in creating that crisis, so "blame" was hard to place on the current administration.



Eastern Air lines flt # 701, EWR-MCO Boeing 757
User currently offlineAviRaider From United States of America, joined Nov 2007, 183 posts, RR: 0
Reply 56, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1459 times:

It's simple, the GOP didn't have the right candidate. Mitt was not polarizing enough, as a candidate and on the issues for people to get a sense of the differences. The popular vote pretty much paints the picture, that this country is virtually split down the middle on ideology. The GOP needs a newcomer someone that feels fresh and has alot of ideas.

User currently offline4holer From United States of America, joined Feb 2002, 3018 posts, RR: 9
Reply 57, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1446 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 15):
If they have a sensible economic plan --which they haven't so far-- and drop the "kick the gays/ban contraception/treat abortion lime murder" thing, they might actually be able to do well.

This.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 17):
e GOP needs to start listening to those in the party who see victory in the middle. Built on a stronger middle class, intelligent government programs and moderation. The wild eyed hard right clearly lost today.

And that.

Quoting csavel (Reply 36):
I think Obama won because of the following (a lot of which has already been mentioned)

Your entire post largely sums it up for this Independent as well.

If a Party represents itself as #1 "Ours is the party of the evangelical christian!!!" I reply, "Well you've excluded me then!".

Drop: your obsession with marginalizing gays (and I'm straight!), abortion/contraception bans, Obama as Muslim/Kenyan, Mexican as scapegoat, AZ Gov Jan Brewer's crooked finger, "you lie!", and other blatant disrespectful attacks on the Office of The President...
Add: Willingness to compromise with those folks across the aisle instead of demonizing them, discussion as to ones own economic plan/vision instead of just attacking the other side.

When it came down to it, I just didn't like the way the Republicans went about the business of politics, and I voted for Obama even though I really didn't want to.



Ghosts appear and fade away.....................
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2189 posts, RR: 1
Reply 58, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1443 times:

Quoting AviRaider (Reply 56):
The popular vote pretty much paints the picture, that this country is virtually split down the middle on ideology.

But what ideology? Don't assume that everyone who voted Republican has social conservative views. If the GOP goes too far down that path in attempt to be "polarizing enough" then they will get nowhere.


User currently offlinebueb0g From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2010, 643 posts, RR: 0
Reply 59, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1446 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
How that is job growth is beyond me.

Because 500,000 jobs have been added... Job growth = the growth of jobs.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Fine, take away Ohio and give it to Romney, Obama's still won.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
This country is still a Center Right country,

Nope. Everyone likes to think that but if you look at specific polling on an issue by issue basis, the country is fundamentally progressive, you guys just don't realise it... Like look at Obamacare. Unpopular bill - when you call it Obamacare. Even if you ask Republicans if they support the individual provisions of the bill (without telling them its Obamacare) they overwhelmingly support it, apart from - yup - the Republican part, the personal mandate.

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 47):
Despite virtually every major economic indicator being worse than when he took office.

Such as? GDP is up... When Obama took office, the US was losing 700,000 jobs a month... Now its gaining over 100,000 a month steadily - a net change of over 800,000 jobs. But in the Republican world, that's bad (but not if a Republican was the incumbent).

Quoting AviRaider (Reply 56):
It's simple, the GOP didn't have the right candidate. Mitt was not polarizing enough, as a candidate and on the issues for people to get a sense of the differences.

Nope - notice how his ratings went up massively when he pretended to be all moderate for the debates? People *hate* the polarisation. They want moderate candidates. People may want a fiscal conservative but they sure as hell no longer want candidates with socially conservative views. Mitt could quite easily have been the right candidate; Romney didn't lose the election, the GOP did. People weren't worried about Romney being the president, they were worried about the GOP getting the presidency. Had he been more polarising the defeat would have been even worse.



Roger roger, what's our vector, victor?
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 60, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1447 times:

Quoting Aloha717200 (Reply 51):

I also feel that the Republicans' social agenda is hurting them. The only way they're going to start winning elections again is if they dump the tea party and return to moderation.
Quoting 4holer (Reply 57):
Drop: your obsession with marginalizing gays (and I'm straight!), abortion/contraception bans, Obama as Muslim/Kenyan, Mexican as scapegoat, AZ Gov Jan Brewer's crooked finger, "you lie!", and other blatant disrespectful attacks on the Office of The President...

Add to that saying that you're trying to fix (negligible amounts of) voter fraud by making it harder for people to vote.




Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 61, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1442 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
53% of Americans still blame the economy on Bush.

That's ridiculous. If you ask for the ball, you'd better not drop the pass. In 2008 Obama stood up and said that he could fix things, and yet he hasn't. Not by a long shot.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Absolutely. He bought himself a win with our money.

I wonder which politician will benefit in thirty years or so when they'll be due for their next bailout...

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 45):
I think most people understood there wasn't an overnight solution

There's a difference between "not overnight" and "four years plus a lot of stimulus and things still suck".



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 62, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1443 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 61):
There's a difference between "not overnight" and "four years plus a lot of stimulus and things still suck".

Don't worry, you'll eventually get a job in aerospace engineering soon enough if you're as qualified as you claim (but your profile says 16 - 20 as your age range?). Keep plugging at it! We're all behind you!   



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 63, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1441 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 62):
Don't worry, you'll eventually get a job in aerospace engineering soon enough if you're as qualified as you claim

Theoretically, but Obama's reelection won't help any. And when I do get a job, I'm sure the government will have no problems heavily taxing single guys with decent salaries to pay for everyone else.

But, it was nice of Obama to tell defense contractors to break the law and he would pick up the tab. He'd better hope Congress finds that $1.2 trillion so it doesn't matter or people might have some tough questions.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 64, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1441 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Quoting flymia (Reply 41):

I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Translation: Obama doing his job well might have won Obama this race.

So you are saying that buying people's votes with taxpayer money is the President's job? How low have we fallen...

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
Most Americans want a smaller government

This is where Republicans are wrong. Most Americans want a smaller government... for other people.

According to exit polls, 54% want the government to do LESS for them, not more.

Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
And most Americans will not see their taxes raised, just as no American has seen his taxes raised in Obama's first term.

When the majority votes to increase taxes on a minority (e.g. "the rich") and cuts for themselves that's called a tyranny of the majority.

Dick Morris wrote an excellent piece today. The Democratic win yesterday comes down to one thing - Divide and Conquer.

Quote:
I’ve got egg on my face. I predicted a Romney landslide and, instead, we ended up with an Obama squeaker.

The key reason for my bum prediction is that I mistakenly believed that the 2008 surge in black, Latino, and young voter turnout would recede in 2012 to “normal” levels. Didn’t happen. These high levels of minority and young voter participation are here to stay. And, with them, a permanent reshaping of our nation’s politics.

In 2012, 13% of the vote was cast by blacks. In 04, it was 11%. This year, 10% was Latino. In ’04 it was 8%. This time, 19% was cast by voters under 30 years of age. In ’04 it was 17%. Taken together, these results swelled the ranks of Obama’s three-tiered base by five to six points, accounting fully for his victory.

I derided the media polls for their assumption of what did, in fact happen: That blacks, Latinos, and young people would show up in the same numbers as they had in 2008. I was wrong. They did.

...

By the time you finish with the various demographic groups the Democrats win, you almost have a majority in their corner. Count them: Blacks cast 13% of the vote and Obama won them 12-1. Latinos cast 10% and Obama carried them by 7-3. Under 30 voters cast 19% of the vote and Obama swept them by 12-7. Single white women cast 18% of the total vote and Obama won them by 12-6. There is some overlap among these groups, of course, but without allowing for any, Obama won 43-17 before the first married white woman or man over 30 cast their vote. (Lets guess that if we eliminate duplication, the Obama margin would be 35-13) Having conceded these votes, Romney would have had to win over two-thirds of the rest of the vote to win. He almost did. But not quite.
http://www.dickmorris.com/why-i-was-...m=dmreports&utm_campaign=dmreports

Plus a little timely help from Hurricane Sandy - this election's October Surprise.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 65, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1437 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
And yet the economy is still struggling.

Why is this a surprise? The Great Recession is a huge problem and will have a generational impact. Two wars on the credit card being wound down. A House of Representatives shaking in fear over the Tea Party and a Senate being blocked by Republicans who's only goal was to make Obama a one term President.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 19):
And the government is planning to cut defense and increase taxes.

There are plenty of arguments for cutting Defense when you are able to cut out those costs directly related to two wars.

A chunk of those war funds need to flow to the VA to take care of Veterans. Long term tax dollars going to Vets, which is something the nation needs to consider critical.

There needs for rebuilding parts of the military that were consumed or worn down. We need to maintain various material systems AND the production facilities within the US to continue producing simple items, like ammunition.

We also need to deliver funding for continual training programs. It's great to have some wicked fighters, but we need pilots who are well trained on a continual basis to make those fighters at a level of maximum efficiency.

Where we can, IMO, cut the billions going to "consultants". We are better of increasing the number of senior officers to do their jobs. The military promotion system pushes out some pretty impressive people, only to pay far more for their talents via private industry contracts.

Reality, though, is that it takes tax revenues to have the military people want. Conservatives can't build up the military and cut revenues at the same time.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 24):
Bring back the tech boom

Have you looked at Apple lately?

Tech at the consumer level is about developing and delivering products that the consumer wants to buy. Apple is delivering a consumer tech boom and has been for years. Look at the companies, not the industry.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 27):
Obama conveys a highly popular image, especially among women "I am the people's friend".
Romney didn't.

I believe that Romney has been too far away from the Middle Class for far too long to really be able to connect with this critical group. How many people felt he would take care of his very wealthy fiends,

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 27):
Romney was seen as the rich people's candidate who would have cut down on the "nanny state" therefore unpopular with the masses. A majority of people really like the idea of a "nanny state".

The real scare for many moderates was related to how much damage Romney AND Ryan would tear down Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. How deep would the cuts have been in order for the very wealthy to get more tax cuts. For people in my age group the far isn't for ourselves, but for our kids and grandkids.

BTW, I don't consider Social Security and Medicare to be "nanny state" programs simply because I paid into these programs during my working years.

Quoting MadameConcorde (Reply 27):
Also most people voted Obama simply because they knew what to expect from him, good or bad.

I think that is true, especially when compared to Romney/Ryan and all the games they were ready to play.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30):
To me, that was waaaay over-done. The GOP spent a lot of time and energy on it and they ended up looking like opportunists instead of leaders.

It was a desperate move that really didn't work very well.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30):
Personally, I didn't like the stimulus, and I hope fiscal issues get a lot more attention.

I loved the stimulus when it was related to investments in infrastructure. Build, Baby, Build. Especially when it is the private sector doing the work with stimulus funding.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 30):
Perhaps, but that's the source of a lot of the enthusiasm in the GOP.

If it becomes all about the Rockefeller Republicans, how are they going to keep the base happy?

A Rockefeller Republican could have won the election yesterday. The American Taliban didn't and, hopefully, never will.

Quoting csavel (Reply 36):
Right wing tea party American Taliban

That is a great phrase.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 38):
53% of Americans still blame the economy on Bush. This is an abnormal situation.

Bush/Cheney was an abnormal economic situation and left the country in The Great Recession. When you do as bad a job as Bush & Cheney did they you are not going to be able to cover it up in a short 4 years. Maybe 40 or 50 years, but I doubt even that.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
Most Americans want a smaller government

But we want the government there when a disaster hits. We want it there to protect us from thalidomide type problems. We want it there to protect our communities, be it with police and fire, or community medical systems.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
I guess they think other issues are more important like Social Issues.

Social Issues, which includes Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, are important for those not in the top1% of the top 1%.

It has to be one of the factors that re-elected Obama and it is going to be one of the most difficult areas for the GOP to look at when trying to rebuild their party.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 42):
If Ohio had been the deciding factor, maybe that would be true, but Florida and Va are the real stories.

Florida was a non-issue in this election. It hasn't even been called and is now in the "who cares" column for this Presidential Election.

Quoting InsideMan (Reply 46):
There's lots of room between a nanny state and leaving everyone alone in their mess, no matter what.

Sometimes it might help to look at the costs of a government program -v- a private industry program. Health care is the classic example. We burden employers with overpriced nanny care benefits while other countries get better ratings (in terms of outcomes) at a far lower cost.

Maybe we need to stop worrying about "nanny" programs and start looking for the most bang for the buck. We need to look overseas for guidance on that when it comes to health care.

Quoting flymia (Reply 41):
Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Tax dollars that generate success can help a PResident (or governor or mayor) get re-elected. The auto bailout was an outstanding success, giving Obama a pretty big lead in states with a lot of workers involved in the auto industry.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 66, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1438 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 63):
Theoretically, but Obama's reelection won't help any. And when I do get a job, I'm sure the government will have no problems heavily taxing single guys with decent salaries to pay for everyone else.

When you get a job, your tax rate will be less than mine was when I started out. So quit the griping.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 63):
But, it was nice of Obama to tell defense contractors to break the law and he would pick up the tab. He'd better hope Congress finds that $1.2 trillion so it doesn't matter or people might have some tough questions.

He asked for it since congress did not do their jobs on the fiscall cliff before adjouning to run for election. Now that the fiscal cliff is inbound, Congress is going to either kick the can down a few months, or they will run us over the cliff and into a depression. I am betting on the can kicking.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 67, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1434 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
Florida was a non-issue in this election. It hasn't even been called and is now in the "who cares" column for this Presidential Election.

My point was about the auto bailout mattering. Sure Ohio was the deciding factor. But if Ohio hadn't gone, Florida , Colorado, Virginia, and Iowa were there to pick up the slack,



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 68, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 1444 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
Why is this a surprise?

Because four years ago there was a guy who stood up and convinced us he could make it better, and didn't but spent a lot of money trying.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
There are plenty of arguments for cutting Defense when you are able to cut out those costs directly related to two wars.

Then cut those costs and leave the rest to make sure there's something left to fight the next war.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
The military promotion system pushes out some pretty impressive people, only to pay far more for their talents via private industry contracts.

That's the only reason I'd have ever considered the military.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
Have you looked at Apple lately?

One company does not a boom make.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 66):
He asked for it since congress did not do their jobs on the fiscall cliff before adjouning to run for election.

...I'm sure that the fact that it would have meant a bunch of layoff notices going out right before election day had nothing to do with it. It was a smart move by Obama.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 69, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1448 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
So you are saying that buying people's votes with taxpayer money is the President's job?

No, but I expect you will pervert whatever I say.

Republicans were screaming bloody murder about jobs in America. But when the President actually works to create or save jobs, you call it "buying people's votes."

(And then you have the gall to say that Romney is not buying votes with the promises of tax cuts.)

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
According to exit polls, 54% want the government to do LESS for them, not more.

Yeah, you're going to need to provide a source if you're going to try to prove me wrong on that one.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
Divide and Conquer.

I have no idea how you read Dick Morris' column and conclude that.

The Republican party has done whatever it can whenever it can to push these voters away. Obama did not divide them out of the American population - the Republicans pushed them to vote for Obama.

If you want your party to ever have power again, you need to stop blaming Obama and take a long look in the Mirror.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 70, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1434 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
...I'm sure that the fact that it would have meant a bunch of layoff notices going out right before election day had nothing to do with it. It was a smart move by Obama.

If congress hadn't kicked the ball in 2011 , we wouldn't be in thi predicament. It was the right thing to do for Obama, and the rest of Congress that didn't want to see Unemployment rise. This would not have been good for any elected official.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 71, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1441 times:

In other news:


In other news: a photo of Seattle this morning after the state of Washington legalized marijuana:



 


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 72, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 1428 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 61):
That's ridiculous.

Nope. It is reality. It is based on just how disastrous an economy Bush delivered.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 61):
He bought himself a win with our money.

Actually he delivered a success with those tax dollars, and we are getting that money back. So, in the end he bought long term jobs with that money and the people who got those jobs vote. As do their family members and friends.

It's very painful for conservatives, but efforts to support American companies & jobs by the government can be very successful. Look at the original Chrysler bailout. Conservatives hated it, they screamed just as loud at the big time profits the government made off the investment.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
Because four years ago there was a guy who stood up and convinced us he could make it better

And he did. Turning the Great Recession around is not a simple 4 year task simply because it was a huge economic puck up that Bush & Cheney left us.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
Then cut those costs and leave the rest to make sure there's something left to fight the next war.

There will be plenty of military might. Look at carrier groups - the Enterprise just finished their last deployment and will be shut down and cut down. (I even posted a link about that). There is, however, a replacement for the Enterprise being built so we're maintaining that strength.

The problem we are having with the military was on the personnel side. Bush/Cheney over deployed troops in the Middle East in order to avoid the political nightmare of bringing back the draft. People were given far too little time between deployments to recover, rebuild family relationships and retrain for the next deployment.

That abuse of the troops will increase long term costs because of issues like PTSD. It has also led to abnormally high suicide rates. And it has cost the military high numbers of O3 & O4 officers. There was an article on the loss of this important group of officers, especially those officers ready to be promoted to major. The military was admitting that they were going to need to prematurely promote some captains to major simply to fill the slots.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
That's the only reason I'd have ever considered the military.

Choosing wisely in joining the military can be a huge step to a very good job later. Personally I'd go for sea duty in the Navy simply because it provides excellent experience as well as excellent exposure to other countries. There have been articles about the development of Naval officers on international relations - they need it because Naval ships go into ports all over the world. Building an understanding of international relations and the different cultures in this world is, in itself, bonus for landing a job in a company with international operations.

In the end, however, the primary reason for joining should be that you are serving your country. That delivers the most rewards over the rest of your life.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
One company does not a boom make.

It could if the competition could keep up.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8841 posts, RR: 24
Reply 73, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1438 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 69):
No, but I expect you will pervert whatever I say.

I asked a simple question.

Quoting D L X (Reply 69):
Republicans were screaming bloody murder about jobs in America. But when the President actually works to create or save jobs, you call it "buying people's votes."

A president (or government in general) can help create jobs by getting out of the way, and in a very few cases, by direct intervention (such as giving tax credits for a new technology). The idea that one of the purposes of the goverment is to create jobs by buying/subsidizing stuff, including military procurement, is a perversion. If the government needs to buy 100 planes for the Air Force, the motivation should be that the Air Force needs them - the fact that their manufacture would create 10,000 jobs should be entirely beside the point and not relevant to the decision.

In fact I am on record here of proposing that the US Air Force buy some EuroFighters, Gripens and Sukhois, in order to shake up Lockheed and Boeing from their complacency.

Quoting D L X (Reply 69):
(And then you have the gall to say that Romney is not buying votes with the promises of tax cuts.)

What will it take for you to get it through your heads that tax cuts/breaks is not the same as government expenditures? It's their money!

Now tax deductions and rules which allow you to get a larger tax refund than the income tax you paid in, 100% that is a bribe - welfare handouts in disguise.

Quoting D L X (Reply 69):
Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
According to exit polls, 54% want the government to do LESS for them, not more.

Yeah, you're going to need to provide a source if you're going to try to prove me wrong on that one.

Sorry, I got the percentage wrong. It's 51% (want less gov't) vs. 43%.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/exit-...still-top-concern#overlay-context=

Quote:
And Romney's campaign against big government seemed to strike a chord. In preliminary results, about half — 51 percent — said government is doing too many things that should be left to the private sector, while 43 percent wanted government to do more. That's a reversal from four years ago.
Quoting D L X (Reply 69):
I have no idea how you read Dick Morris' column and conclude that.

The Republican party has done whatever it can whenever it can to push these voters away.

The GOP does not talk to them at all! The GOP has this silly idea that everyone should be treated equally, and not pandered to separately. The Democrats basically discovered race-based divide and conquer tactics in the 60s, (when they started targeting the traditionally Republican black vote).



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 74, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1441 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 72):
Actually he delivered a success with those tax dollars, and we are getting that money back.

If I wanted GM stock, I'd have bought GM stock. It's not the government's place to bail out private companies.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 72):
So, in the end he bought long term jobs with that money and the people who got those jobs vote. As do their family members and friends.

...what about the people who work for other companies that managed their way through the recession without government help? How about the people whose companies should not have to face competition from a company that shouldn't be in existence in its present form? The government picked the winners and losers.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 72):
It's very painful for conservatives, but efforts to support American companies & jobs by the government can be very successful.

If the only way to not fail is to get bailed out by the government, it means you failed.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 72):
Look at the original Chrysler bailout. Conservatives hated it, they screamed just as loud at the big time profits the government made off the investment.

If the bailout was such a success, why did they come back for another round in thirty years? People should learn their lesson and cut off crap like this. If you can't compete, you go out of business.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 72):
It could if the competition could keep up.

Trust me, I don't expect the likes of Apple or Google to apologize for their success. But the tech boom was a lot deeper than consumer electronics.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 75, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1415 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 74):
It's not the government's place to bail out private companies.

Why not?

You guys keep saying it as if this is a stone cold fact, but it really isn't anything more than an opinion.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
A president (or government in general) can help create jobs by getting out of the way

Clearly, that is not the only way.

Face it dude, you're going to whine no matter what a Democrat does.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
The idea that one of the purposes of the goverment is to create jobs by buying/subsidizing stuff, including military procurement, is a perversion. If the government needs to buy 100 planes for the Air Force, the motivation should be that the Air Force needs them - the fact that their manufacture would create 10,000 jobs should be entirely beside the point and not relevant to the decision.

You're in the small minority on that issue even in your own party.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
It's their money!

No, it's buying votes. Literally.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
Sorry, I got the percentage wrong. It's 51% (want less gov't) vs. 43%.

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/exit-...text=

That article does not support your argument. Like, at all.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
The GOP has this silly idea that everyone should be treated equally, and not pandered to separately.

Baloney. The GOP may pretend that they are blind to ethnicity, but who is being targeted on immigration? On national security? On welfare? It ain't white people. You need to be honest with yourself instead of blaming others.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
The Democrats basically discovered race-based divide and conquer tactics in the 60s, (when they started targeting the traditionally Republican black vote).

I'm sorry, but are you really criticizing the Civil Rights Act of 1964? And have you ever heard of the Southern Strategy used to thwart it?



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 76, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1415 times:

Quoting D L X (Reply 75):
Why not?

Because they do it with our money. I'm fine with paying taxes to fund services the government provides for me. Keeping mediocre car companies afloat does not provide me any service, or at least the benefit I could derive from it is something I could do myself. It's a decision the government needlessly takes from our hands. The reason why they needed the bailout in the first place is that nobody else was willing to touch it. Now if all of the best financial people in private equity and banks realize that the investment is toxic and not good enough for them, why would I want taxpayer money in it? The problem with the government is that they are always spending other people's money. Nobody was willing to put their money into it, but they were all too willing to put mine into it.

If I wanted a piece of the company, I'd buy it myself.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7175 posts, RR: 9
Reply 77, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1400 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 53):

Just wanted to make sure. I have seen some post on social media thinking that site is a real news.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineFlyPNS1 From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 6608 posts, RR: 24
Reply 78, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
The idea that one of the purposes of the goverment is to create jobs by buying/subsidizing stuff, including military procurement, is a perversion.

It is a bit of a perversion, but the GOP is just as guilty of it. Romney and George Allen (running for Senator in Virginia) both campaigned aggressively that they would "create" jobs in Virginia by increasing defense spending. They never said why we needed to increase defense spending, just that it would create jobs.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 79, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 63):
Theoretically, but Obama's reelection won't help any. And when I do get a job, I'm sure the government will have no problems heavily taxing single guys with decent salaries to pay for everyone else.

I'm still wondering why you don't go to China to get that job. Very little pesky government to get into the way of a rising star like yourself, the rest that does can just be paid off, perfect for a social Darwinist like yourself. Go to China, my young social Darwinist shark, and feed on the fishes! It's your best shot at being at the top of the skyscraper drinking Dom while your inferiors live in slums a few blocks away, nicely fenced off so you don't have to see them when your limo takes you from place to place.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 64):
Quoting D L X (Reply 43):
Quoting flymia (Reply 41):

I agree with that. Our tax dollars might have won Obama this race.

Translation: Obama doing his job well might have won Obama this race.

So you are saying that buying people's votes with taxpayer money is the President's job? How low have we fallen...

Great twist job here.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 68):
Because four years ago there was a guy who stood up and convinced us he could make it better, and didn't but spent a lot of money trying.

That's because 12 years ago a guy decided he could cut taxes across the board without reducing expenditures, indeed got us into two wars with huge expenditures, and was hoping and praying that a housing bubble would last another year or so longer than it did, but it didn't.

Too bad the country didn't get a chance to vote on how that guy from four years ago was doing his job.

Oh, wait, we did, and it was just yesterday, and the country re-elected him!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 74):
If I wanted GM stock, I'd have bought GM stock. It's not the government's place to bail out private companies.

You might have noticed that more than a few private companies did go under at the time, and the government did nothing to help them.

In the case of GM and Chrysler, both parties and both administrations realized that the cost of them (and their supply chains) going down would cost more in unemployment etc than it would to merely loan them money and help them survive.

You might want to wake up and realize that your point of view LOST yesterday.

If that depresses you, well, as above, China looks mighty tempting, doesn't it?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 80, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1400 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 76):

Because they do it with our money. I'm fine with paying taxes to fund services the government provides for me.

That's cool. There's about 60 million other people that either think the services provided were for them, or think that it's more that just "me, me, ME!"

Seriously, grow up.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinebjorn14 From Norway, joined Feb 2010, 3464 posts, RR: 2
Reply 81, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1401 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 60):
Add to that saying that you're trying to fix (negligible amounts of) voter fraud by making it harder for people to vote.

No one was crying when we didn't have early voting. There was a time when everybody voted on the SAME day. When I lived in the US there were two things I never did early, open presents and vote.



"I want to know the voice of God the rest is just details" --A. Einstein
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7914 posts, RR: 51
Reply 82, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1402 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 81):
There was a time when everybody voted on the SAME day.

What's wrong with early voting? Seriously? It's very convenient. It allows more people to vote. Personally, if I didn't vote early, I probably wouldn't have been able to fly. I came in early, got delayed, finally got a plane, flew, debriefed, and it was pretty late when I got out.

Some people are working 2 jobs. Seriously, why is early voting a big deal?



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 83, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 1407 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 79):
I'm still wondering why you don't go to China to get that job.

I'm more than willing to listen to offers. Just a matter of getting someone to write a check. Nobody has earned my loyalty.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 79):
You might have noticed that more than a few private companies did go under at the time, and the government did nothing to help them.

So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others? Seems like the government picking winners and losers.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 79):
In the case of GM and Chrysler, both parties and both administrations realized that the cost of them (and their supply chains) going down would cost more

Funny you should mention that, since just today there was a news item the Ford and GM teamed up to bail out one of their Australian suppliers, without the government buying the supplier. Of course, the article also says that Australia provides $2.5 billion per year, so how sustainable the industry is would be very questionable, but at least it's not my money.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 79):
You might want to wake up and realize that your point of view LOST yesterday.

Who wouldn't vote for the guy who saved your job with other peoples' money?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinemt99 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 6593 posts, RR: 6
Reply 84, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1401 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others? Seems like the government picking winners and loser

Tell us what you do, who you work for and we will gladly look into it.



Step into my office, baby
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 85, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
my money
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
not my money.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
other peoples' money?

Let's get one thing straight: IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY. IT'S EVERYBODY'S MONEY. You are not the sole provider of taxes to the US government (and I would be very surprised if you've broken out of the bottom million taxpayers yet).

You act as if your personal fortune has been taken away to save GM. I wasn't aware that you had 50 billion dollars taken away in taxes.

Now that we got that straight:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others? Seems like the government picking winners and losers.

And just think how many of your our dollars would have been saved paying those people who would have lost their jobs for not producing anything?



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5608 posts, RR: 8
Reply 86, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1405 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
I'm more than willing to listen to offers. Just a matter of getting someone to write a check. Nobody has earned my loyalty.

And therein lies your problem, it is not the employers task to earn your loyalty prior to hiring you (*there are some exceptions to this for those people who have well proven abilities or success), it is your task to prove your worth to them once you are hired. Once your value as an employee is proven they will well reward you to keep you or risk losing you to another company.

(You know if I didn't know you better I would say you sound like a lot of those people on the dole that keeping saying "I haven't found the right opportunity yet" but are waiting for abetter paycheck than the unemployment or welfare they are currently receiving. But I know that is not you as you are against that.)

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 87, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1405 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 74):
It's not the government's place to bail out private companies.

But it is the government's place to (as you suggested on another thread) support your chosen industry so that you can have a job?

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 81):
There was a time when everybody voted on the SAME day.

And there was a time when people didn't have to work several jobs to make ends meet. Times change.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 88, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1410 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
There's about 60 million other people that either think the services provided were for them,

Where were those people? If everyone thought that saving Chrysler and GM with their money was such a great idea, why did the government have to do it at all? They should have been lining up to invest in a sure fire win. They should have been clamoring to get a piece of the dream. They should have been excited for the chance to invest in America! Except that they weren't. Nobody was willing to step in, which is why the government had to. People weren't that interested in saving the car companies with their money, but it's cool with them to use someone else's money.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 80):
think that it's more that just "me, me, ME!"

Thinking that way is when you start to lose. Pushing everything towards the middle makes a giant blob of average, which is a problem since America built itself on not being average. Maximize the ceiling and the floor takes care of itself.

That line of thinking is the beginning of the end. Deciding that not losing is better than winning and that things should be done for you rather than doing things for yourself is when any chance of being exceptional will die.

Quoting mt99 (Reply 84):
Tell us what you do, who you work for and we will gladly look into it.

Unemployed, and from what I've heard, a lot of it has to do with governmental wrangling over budgets and a large swath of politicians looking to slash defense spending while bailing out companies that have legitimately run themselves out of business. Why should the government save GM and Chrysler while letting others fail? Why should they punish those companies that managed themselves in a way that allowed them to survive the downturn by leaving them competitors they shouldn't have, at least not in their present form? Was it the unions? Votes in swing states?



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12563 posts, RR: 25
Reply 89, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1410 times:

Quoting bjorn14 (Reply 81):
There was a time when everybody voted on the SAME day.

Right, and there was a time when kids rode horseback to school. What's your point?

I used to get Election Day off from school as a kid. Now, forget about getting it off as a company holiday.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others?

Then, what, Linens n’ Things employees?

I think it has something to do with the fact that if ALL of GM, Chrysler and their suppliers employees got laid off at the same time, and they all pulled a bunch of cash out of their very shaky banks at the same time, and went down to their government unemployment offices at the same time, there'd be a bigger mess than if the government just loaned them the money, and it'd be a lot harder to rebuild the economy if all those workers were gone with the wind. Linen n' Things? Not so much.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
Funny you should mention that, since just today there was a news item the Ford and GM teamed up to bail out one of their Australian suppliers, without the government buying the supplier.

Funny how you don't seem to mention that banks are willing to lend Ford and GM money these days, whereas they weren't in 2008. Back then most of the banks were too busy wondering if they'd crash or not due to all the crap CMOs they had in their vaults, with AIG's worthless insurance backing them up.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5608 posts, RR: 8
Reply 90, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1410 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 85):
Let's get one thing straight: IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY. IT'S EVERYBODY'S MONEY. You are not the sole provider of taxes to the US government (and I would be very surprised if you've broken out of the bottom million taxpayers yet).

I am betting that he is still living on the "public dime" in that he has not yet contributed more in taxes etc that he has benefited from in his life. And he probably doesn't even realize it. From state land for schools to assistance for college loans to industries that depend on public funding and monies, to the rules and laws created and passed by the communities he lives in, the "common good" is a vast element of our stable and successful society. Even if some don't want to admit it.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 91, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1408 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):

Where were those people? If everyone thought that saving Chrysler and GM with their money was such a great idea, why did the government have to do it at all? They should have been lining up to invest in a sure fire win. They should have been clamoring to get a piece of the dream. They should have been excited for the chance to invest in America! Except that they weren't. Nobody was willing to step in, which is why the government had to. People weren't that interested in saving the car companies with their money, but it's cool with them to use someone else's money.

Wow. You really have no clue what you're talking about, do you? Just explain to me how "the people" could have independently "lined up" to buy out a bankrupt company at above-market rates?

The correct answer is: they can't. Governments can do things that individuals or even large groups of people can't.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):
Thinking that way is when you start to lose. Pushing everything towards the middle makes a giant blob of average, which is a problem since America built itself on not being average. Maximize the ceiling and the floor takes care of itself.

That line of thinking is the beginning of the end. Deciding that not losing is better than winning and that things should be done for you rather than doing things for yourself is when any chance of being exceptional will die.

     

Say that in 10 years, after you've had a chance to live and work in the real world, and not the fantasy one Fox News has created for you. At some point, you will realize that you can't do everything by yourself, and having things done for you will actually help you grow.

Oh, and for the record, America first built itself by forcing Natives off their lands.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):

Unemployed, and from what I've heard, a lot of it has to do with governmental wrangling over budgets and a large swath of politicians looking to slash defense spending while bailing out companies that have legitimately run themselves out of business

Bullshit. You are unemployed because you spend the time you could be looking for a job, posting about how unfair it is the government takes YOUR money (that you don't even make!).

It's funny how you preach self-sufficiency in one sentence, but don't hesitate to blame the actions of others for your own shortcomings.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 92, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1408 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 85):
Let's get one thing straight: IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY. IT'S EVERYBODY'S MONEY.

That's the problem with liberals: they start with the premise that they (or the government) should get the right of first refusal and people should be happy with whatever's left.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 85):
You act as if your personal fortune has been taken away to save GM. I wasn't aware that you had 50 billion dollars taken away in taxes.

Considering what I might realistically make over the course of a career, with a government more than willing to take over a third of my income, we are talking about a small fortune. At least it's enough money to get me to pay attention. I'd rather control and use as much of that money as possible in the way that I choose.

Quoting tugger (Reply 86):
And therein lies your problem, it is not the employers task to earn your loyalty prior to hiring you

My point was that there is nothing special about America that would keep me here if there were a better opportunity.

I've always promised myself that there would never be a situation too good to walk away from. I'll never be loyal to any company I don't own, and maybe not even then. Loyalty to the people you work with is one thing, but I know I'll always be a government program or two away from having whatever "loyalty" there is being wiped out.

Quoting Mir (Reply 87):
But it is the government's place to (as you suggested on another thread) support your chosen industry so that you can have a job?

I don't expect it to be supported as a jobs program, it should be supported because it's needed. But cutting defense to support further social programs when defense actually does need the funds is a poor idea. Especially when the government has no problem looking out for others. I don't need the government to provide everything, but it's ridiculous to see them taking care of pretty much every group but mine. Like I've said before, who creates more jobs? Trailer trash single moms or people with engineering degrees?

Quoting Revelation (Reply 89):
Then, what, Linens n%u2019 Things employees?

Circuit City could have used a bailout. Companies need to be put on notice that there will be no more bailouts and their problems will not become taxpayer problems.

Quoting tugger (Reply 90):
I am betting that he is still living on the "public dime" in that he has not yet contributed more in taxes etc that he has benefited from in his life.

Not really. My family never made a lot of money yet managed to set aside enough money for my siblings and I to be educated and my parents should be able to retire and I'm lucky enough to have some savings to last me for a while. Sure there's no McMansion or giant flatscreen, but the people saying that Americans need government help to get by unless they are wealthy are full of it.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 91):
Just explain to me how "the people" could have independently "lined up" to buy out a bankrupt company at above-market rates?

Private equity, mutual funds, etc. All those investment vehicles, some of which specialize in turning around failing companies, could have played a part in saving the car companies either as a whole or after a breakup. Nobody was willing to put money into failing companies except the government.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 91):
You are unemployed because you spend the time you could be looking for a job, posting about how unfair it is the government takes YOUR money (that you don't even make!).

I spend plenty of time looking for jobs, but I can tell you there aren't many out there. And why would I support measures that might help me today but spend the next four decades or so kicking my ass?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 91):
It's funny how you preach self-sufficiency in one sentence, but don't hesitate to blame the actions of others for your own shortcomings.

I've heard from more than one person that the uncertainty is killing hiring. Nobody knows what's going to be funded and what isn't and until that's solved it's a holding pattern.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 93, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1397 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 77):
Just wanted to make sure. I have seen some post on social media thinking that site is a real news.

Not a problem, "mismaladjusted" was the final drop in my bucket.



Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlineAKiss20 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 609 posts, RR: 5
Reply 94, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 91):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):

Unemployed, and from what I've heard, a lot of it has to do with governmental wrangling over budgets and a large swath of politicians looking to slash defense spending while bailing out companies that have legitimately run themselves out of business

Bullshit. You are unemployed because you spend the time you could be looking for a job, posting about how unfair it is the government takes YOUR money (that you don't even make!).

It's funny how you preach self-sufficiency in one sentence, but don't hesitate to blame the actions of others for your own shortcomings.

Plus one to this. I don't post much, but this really pisses me off. BMI, from what I can tell, we are in much the same place in our lives, Aerospace engineering students, very near graduation, and looking what is the next step. I am going to grad school first, not industry, but my point will still stand.

You sit there complaining how the government takes your money (which, as a student, it takes almost none of. How do I know? I get a refund check too, just like you) but then you can't find an aerospace job because they are slashing defense. Guess what, there are aerospace jobs out there to be had. I am not even looking for a full-time position and have gotten several offers for such. I have grad school lined up and ready to go. You know how? That precious personal responsibility you keep exposing. I don't sit here waiting for the government, or Boeing, or GE to offer me a job, I go out and impress the hell out of every single person I have worked with (and I have had the great fortune to work with some of the top people in both industry and academia). That's how you get a job, you push yourself to do every possible thing you can, to be the best you possibly can. Is it easy? Hell no it isn't, but that's what you do to be the best, and you can and will be rewarded. Aerospace engineering is one of the few fields that is actually looking up, and has been.

I am a future aerospace engineer, just like you, but I recognize that defense spending is out of control (look at the F35 program for god's sake), even if that may cost me a job. I recognize it because I am not looking out only for myself, but for my friends, my family, and my countrymen. The idealization of the "so long as I get mine" attitude is at best unproductive and ineffective, and at worst, puerile. We are a country, not a land of singular individuals. The best achievements of mankind were not achieved by a man, any man, but by men.



Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5608 posts, RR: 8
Reply 95, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1399 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Not really. My family never made a lot of money yet managed to set aside enough money for my siblings and I to be educated and my parents should be able to retire and I'm lucky enough to have some savings to last me for a while. Sure there's no McMansion or giant flatscreen, but the people saying that Americans need government help to get by unless they are wealthy are full of it.

You are missing the important points of what I said. It's not that your family has done OK and save d and provided for you and the family as a whole. It is that you are living in a place were that are laws that have been passed by people whose salary you did not pay and those laws are enforced by people that you do not pay and they patrol and your drive on streets that you have not paid for (fully) and if the the school you went to was public then you were on land you did not pay for and were taught by teachers that you or you parents did not fully pay for.... I assume you understand how this all works right? You are standing on the shoulder of those many people that came before you and paid into the community so that you would have the benefits that you derived from it.

You probably need to pay back in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxes etc, before you will reach the point that you begin to pay in more than you have used. Now I do know from reading your posts that you very much intend to reach that point which is great so more power to you.

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 96, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
That's the problem with liberals: they start with the premise that they (or the government) should get the right of first refusal and people should be happy with whatever's left.

Wow. Try reading what I wrote again.

BTW, fiscal conservative here. But cool attempt anyways.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Considering what I might realistically make over the course of a career,
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
I'll never be loyal to any company I don't own, and maybe not even then.

  

With your attitude, you won't have a career. In fact, it's precisely your attitude towards "loyalty" that caused this whole mess in the first place!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Circuit City could have used a bailout.

Just how much economic damage did Circuit City going out of business do? Did it's failing also cause 10 other large companies to fail?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):

Private equity, mutual funds, etc. All those investment vehicles, some of which specialize in turning around failing companies, could have played a part in saving the car companies either as a whole or after a breakup. Nobody was willing to put money into failing companies except the government.

LOL. Sign up for an Economics 201 course next semester, assuming, of course, you've done 101 (which is unlikely considering the crap you just posted).

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
I spend plenty of time looking for jobs, but I can tell you there aren't many out there

Bullshit. Unless you work in construction... wait, nope even that's picking back up. If you're looking for a $25/hr analyst job that doesn't require a college degree, then yeah... not too many of those. Ever consider walking down to the local McDonalds or Subway for some type of income?

I can tell you there are plenty of jobs out there. YOU have to be a little less picky and a little more aggressive to get one. And I guarantee you that if you get off the computer and start walking into places, you'll have a job within two weeks.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7914 posts, RR: 51
Reply 97, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1399 times:

Quoting AKiss20 (Reply 94):
I am a future aerospace engineer, just like you, but I recognize that defense spending is out of control (look at the F35 program for god's sake), even if that may cost me a job.

      I always hate it when someone says "you want ______ elected, he said he's gonna cut the military's budget!" (and I'm in the military.)

Well sadly, I do think our military spending is way out of control, and I vote to make the country do its best, not just for selfish reasons that will benefit me (unfairly)



Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 98, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

Quoting AKiss20 (Reply 94):
I don't sit here waiting for the government, or Boeing, or GE to offer me a job, I go out and impress the hell out of every single person I have worked with (and I have had the great fortune to work with some of the top people in both industry and academia).

Trust me, I'm not waiting on anyone. But everyone in the industry has told me that my qualifications are fine and I should easily be hired, yet I'm not. Hell, I hardly get any interviews.

Quoting AKiss20 (Reply 94):
Aerospace engineering is one of the few fields that is actually looking up, and has been.

People have said that too, just like the hiring wave that's been two months away since June.

Either way, I'm losing patience. If I get burned by this recession I might go back to school and try to make money causing the next one.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1574 posts, RR: 0
Reply 99, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1402 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):
Where were those people? If everyone thought that saving Chrysler and GM with their money was such a great idea, why did the government have to do it at all? They should have been lining up to invest in a sure fire win. They should have been clamoring to get a piece of the dream. They should have been excited for the chance to invest in America! Except that they weren't. Nobody was willing to step in, which is why the government had to. People weren't that interested in saving the car companies with their money, but it's cool with them to use someone else's money.

Why aren't you advocating people lining up to pay for the military if they want it so badly with whatever mechanism you think is applicable to the auto companies?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Considering what I might realistically make over the course of a career,

You actually said that?! A career you don't have?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
with a government more than willing to take over a third of my income,

A third of bugger all is still bugger all my friend.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
when defense actually does need the funds

Prove it.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Like I've said before, who creates more jobs?

I'm not sure but I'll guess its not the one who spends their time whining on the Internet about why some politician is blocking his path to becoming a millionaire, the way you go on you'd think Obama himself was outside your front door with a gun not letting you out.

Fred


User currently offlineEA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 13608 posts, RR: 61
Reply 100, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1406 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting aloges (Reply 53):
Quoting flymia (Reply 50):Can't tell you know this is a fake news website or not.
I thought it was obvious, but still included the    smiley to make it even clearer.

Next time use the   instead. The    implied that you were laughing as if the story were real.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 65):
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 24):Bring back the tech boom
Have you looked at Apple lately?

Yes, it's down considerably.



"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2189 posts, RR: 1
Reply 101, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1413 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98):
Trust me, I'm not waiting on anyone. But everyone in the industry has told me that my qualifications are fine and I should easily be hired, yet I'm not. Hell, I hardly get any interviews.

With the attitude you frequently display it is no surprise. It is not just about your academic performance, it is about your social skills. You have to be willing to work well with others, make sacrifices, and actually enjoy what your doing. Its painfully obvious when someone is just in it for themselves and only after money, and that attitude doesn't work in the sciences and engineering (it can work for business). As an engineer you should know it is a collaborative industry.

Saying you are not loyal to a company you don't own is telling them you can't be trusted with industry secrets and that you might bail out on them at any opportunity. There goes their motivation to spend money on you.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 102, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1407 times:

Quoting tugger (Reply 95):
I assume you understand how this all works right?

Those are all services that are valuable and I'm willing to pay for. Things like bailing out car companies aren't.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 96):
In fact, it's precisely your attitude towards "loyalty" that caused this whole mess in the first place!

I don't think so at all. I know that loyalty to any company or institution is purely a one way street. Nobody ever went to a company picnic for the company, they go for the people they work with.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 96):
Bullshit. Unless you work in construction... wait, nope even that's picking back up. If you're looking for a $25/hr analyst job that doesn't require a college degree, then yeah... not too many of those.

Somebody tell me where they are then. I'm sure as hell not finding them and I look for hours each day.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 96):
Ever consider walking down to the local McDonalds or Subway for some type of income?

Hell no. I've worked too hard for that crap. I spent four years getting a six figure education specifically so I don't have to do that.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 99):
Why aren't you advocating people lining up to pay for the military if they want it so badly with whatever mechanism you think is applicable to the auto companies?

Because you just cannot have a privately funded military. They'd just be gangs of thugs. I'm conservative, not an anarchist.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 99):
You actually said that?! A career you don't have?

Chalk it up to optimism, which is uncharacteristic for me.

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 99):
Prove it.

You think ten years of war doesn't take a toll on equipment?

Quoting Polot (Reply 101):
As an engineer you should know it is a collaborative industry.

Of course I know that. There's a difference between being loyal to your team and being loyal to your company.

Quoting Polot (Reply 101):
Saying you are not loyal to a company you don't own is telling them you can't be trusted with industry secrets and that you might bail out on them at any opportunity.

Loyalty is something beyond not breaching a contract. Loyalty is hanging around and doing things you don't need to do when you know you won't get paid for it. It works great with people, but with companies it's a one way proposition.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8544 posts, RR: 2
Reply 103, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1402 times:

Quoting caliatenza (Reply 23):
Well Obama said he wants to go with Clinton era economics. I seem to recall that the rich did just fine with the Clinton era tax rates

It would be great news to drastically, epically slash government spending way down to Clinton era levels. I reckon business leaders would either die of happiness, or crown Obama king for life.

A return to the Clinton years would warm my heart. It just isn't likely to happen. The disease is much further advanced now. People depend on free health care and free food, war-era Pentagon spending and so-called "stimulus needs" throughout the budget. Kind of like why a crack addict keeps smoking crack.

Arguing with today's government about the budget is like trying to reason with a 700-lb man about not eating 40 hamburgers per day. It is manifestly not an argument that you're likely to win, even though you're right. Sometimes people destroy themselves. Maybe it is best look the other way.

Roughly speaking, the federal outlay was around 18% of GDP during the clinton years... Recently, it zoomed to 24%. That's a difference in today's dollars of about 1 trillion dollars _annually_.

Even Mitt Romney wasn't at all so bold as to suggest slashing the govt budget back to Clinton levels. That would be so business friendly, people's heads would explode.

[Edited 2012-11-07 16:23:49]

User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 104, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1408 times:

Quoting DeltaMD90 (Reply 97):
Quoting AKiss20 (Reply 94):
I am a future aerospace engineer, just like you, but I recognize that defense spending is out of control (look at the F35 program for god's sake), even if that may cost me a job.

      I always hate it when someone says "you want ______ elected, he said he's gonna cut the military's budget!" (and I'm in the military.)

Right?

I'm from a military family myself, and spent many years personally as a DOD civilian. But I recognize that the real budget cuts are going to come from large, expensive things, not little things like earmarks or welfare, which are truly small potatoes. I can't stand it when I suggest that we should reduce military spending (since F-35s are cool as @#$% but aren't going to stop terrorists) and someone responds with:

"well, my father is a Commander in the Navy, and my husband is at sea as a Lieutenant, and he tells me that they don't have enough on the boat when they go. How are you going to tell me that we should cut the military budgets?"



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1574 posts, RR: 0
Reply 105, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1405 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 102):
Those are all services that are valuable and I'm willing to pay for.

But what if others aren't willing to pay for it? and others are willing to pay for other things? and they vote with their....Ballot papers?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 102):

You think ten years of war doesn't take a toll on equipment?

so you would advocate pre 2001 levels of military spending after corrective maintenance of some equipment? Sounds good. You can get civvies to do the corrective maintenance, safer for them and requires less military training so it'll be done quicker and cheaper.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 102):
Because you just cannot have a privately funded military. They'd just be gangs of thugs. I'm conservative, not an anarchist.

Just like you can't have lots of other things privately funded.

Fred


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 106, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1407 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 102):
Hell no. I've worked too hard for that crap. I spent four years getting a six figure education specifically so I don't have to do that.

And this is why you'll never find a decent job.

Learn a little humility.

EDIT:

Also, you're not unemployed because there's no jobs, you're unemployed because you are WAY too picky about the job you want.

[Edited 2012-11-07 16:38:53]


"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2189 posts, RR: 1
Reply 107, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 102):
Loyalty is something beyond not breaching a contract. Loyalty is hanging around and doing things you don't need to do when you know you won't get paid for it. It works great with people, but with companies it's a one way proposition.

And companies want that. They want employees who are excited about their work and willing to go the extra mile to finish their project even if that means doing uncompensated work, and in the sciences and engineering, if you tuely love what you are doing you will. It is not a one way proposition with companies. In the short term, sure you might get no immediate benefit, but in the long run those are the people who have successful careers and reach the top of the company/industry, and are not standing in the unemployment line when the economy (or industry, or company, or whatever) goes south.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 108, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 106):
Learn a little humility.

Humility is overrated.

I worked hard and I'm not going to apologize for it or lower myself to a position I'm overqualified for. I don't want to sweep floors or flip burgers so I worked to put myself in a position where I won't have to. Doing menial work would be a waste, for me and the people I'd work for.

I have no interest in trying to cut my losses. If I don't work for a year I don't lose a year of entry level salary, I lose a year of the maximum salary I'll ever make. Consequently, not having work now means the job I do get has to be that much better to make up for it. It's about swinging for the fences.

Quoting Polot (Reply 107):
t is not a one way proposition with companies. In the short term, sure you might get no immediate benefit, but in the long run those are the people who have successful careers and reach the top of the company/industry

If they make sure I have a successful career I'll go the extra mile every time. Believe me, I'm not a clock puncher and I can't stand people who are. But none of that would stop a company from laying me off if funding gets cut. I'm not under any illusion that any employer will look out for me, so subsequently I have to look out for me.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 109, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1412 times:

Quoting AKiss20 (Reply 94):
You sit there complaining how the government takes your money (which, as a student, it takes almost none of. How do I know? I get a refund check too, just like you) but then you can't find an aerospace job because they are slashing defense. Guess what, there are aerospace jobs out there to be had. I am not even looking for a full-time position and have gotten several offers for such. I have grad school lined up and ready to go. You know how? That precious personal responsibility you keep exposing. I don't sit here waiting for the government, or Boeing, or GE to offer me a job, I go out and impress the hell out of every single person I have worked with (and I have had the great fortune to work with some of the top people in both industry and academia). That's how you get a job, you push yourself to do every possible thing you can, to be the best you possibly can. Is it easy? Hell no it isn't, but that's what you do to be the best, and you can and will be rewarded. Aerospace engineering is one of the few fields that is actually looking up, and has been.
*Stands and applauds*

And AKiss20 is a white man. No affirmative action for him at all. Yet somehow, he is a student at one of the most prestigious science and engineering schools in the world and he is doing well and living the American Dream.

How does he do it? He works his butt off. That's how he does it. Sure, he's got some inherent skill and that's not to be discounted, but he's made a decision to make good use of it.

Know how I know that? Because I'm about 10 years older than he is and I did the exact same thing (except not in aerospace engineering; way too much math for me, thank you!). And I'm also a white guy who didn't benefit from one iota of affirmative action.

(I bring up affirmative action not because you did, but because it's also a common gripe of conservatives who seem to be trouble getting into a good school and finding a job. Willing to blame everyone else except themselves.)

I believe in an America where being born to a poor family doesn't damn you from ever being able to get an education. I believe in an America where a bit of bad luck doesn't destroy your entire life. I believe in an America where hard work, not a silver spoon are what make you successful.

That's not the America that I see in the eyes of the GOP.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 98):
Trust me, I'm not waiting on anyone. But everyone in the industry has told me that my qualifications are fine and I should easily be hired, yet I'm not. Hell, I hardly get any interviews.

But others just like you are, so maybe the problem isn't qualifications. There is actually a SHORTAGE of workers with technical educations at the college level and higher. I don't know what it is because I haven't met you or worked with you, but maybe you need to do some serious self-evaluation to find out why you can't get a job.

It's horribly hypocritical of you to blame that on the government when you claim to be so independent of the government.


User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2189 posts, RR: 1
Reply 110, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 108):
But none of that would stop a company from laying me off if funding gets cut. I'm not under any illusion that any employer will look out for me, so subsequently I have to look out for me.

If you are actually good at what you do and are making the company money YOUR funding won't get cut, someone else's will. And if you are truly good at what you do and a company tries and screw you over you run to their competitors, who will gladly accept you with open arms. If you are an excellent worker your employer will look out for you. The defense/aerospace industry is very different from, for example, financial institutions; their entire livelihood depends on the quality of their engineers.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 111, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 109):
There is actually a SHORTAGE of workers with technical educations at the college level and higher.

I don't think that's true. I'm hearing about there being well over a thousand applications for some positions. I'm sure I'm near the top of that, but it's hard to think that investing in lottery tickets might have a better payoff.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 109):
It's horribly hypocritical of you to blame that on the government when you claim to be so independent of the government.

I'm not blaming the government for all of it, there is still a recession after all. Honestly, some of the people telling me that governmental uncertainty is a problem are probably overselling it, but the sequestration thing is there and it's real. There are too many people telling me I should have been hired yesterday and that it's just the market to ignore it, and trust me, I want to. I wish someone would tell me what I need to do differently, but everyone just says to wait. I still don't buy it, but that's what I'm hearing.

But the real problem isn't that the government hasn't provided me a job. That's what happens during recessions. My problem is that they spent billions on saving GM and Chrysler for the explicit purpose of saving jobs. What makes them more important than me? Or the people who worked at Circuit City? Or any number of other, smaller businesses that bit the dust since 2008? That's the problem.

Quoting Polot (Reply 110):
And if you are truly good at what you do and a company tries and screw you over you run to their competitors, who will gladly accept you with open arms. If you are an excellent worker your employer will look out for you.

That's what it's all about: making sure to get paid or finding someone who will pay more. To me, loyalty to a company means writing a check. If you want me to work and give an above and beyond effort I'm going to have to be compensated for it. Sacrificing without compensation for the good of a company that won't do the same is probably not a good idea.

[Edited 2012-11-07 17:02:19]


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 112, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1405 times:

Quoting mt99 (Reply 84):
Tell us what you do, who you work for and we will gladly look into it.
Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):
Unemployed

What the hell?! Are you the "I've been on food stamps and welfare and nobody helped me out" guy?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yTwpBLzxe4U

[Edited 2012-11-07 17:07:56]


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinePolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2189 posts, RR: 1
Reply 113, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 111):
That's what it's all about: making sure to get paid or finding someone who will pay more. To me, loyalty to a company means writing a check. If you want me to work and give an above and beyond effort I'm going to have to be compensated for it. Sacrificing without compensation for the good of a company that won't do the same is probably not a good idea.

And if you make that clear to a company you will never get a job. Companies want you to be enthusiastic about them, they don't want people who are only interested in money and personal wealth. If you are just interested in that then, and I am sorry to be the one who breaks this to you, you picked the the wrong industry. Especially if you have no plans to get a graduate degree.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8544 posts, RR: 2
Reply 114, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 108):
I have no interest in trying to cut my losses. If I don't work for a year I don't lose a year of entry level salary, I lose a year of the maximum salary I'll ever make. Consequently, not having work now means the job I do get has to be that much better to make up for it. It's about swinging for the fences.

Here's one way I'll agree with that. Spending 2 years on a team that respects you & your valuable skills is worth spending 10 years on a team that won't promote you and treats you like shit.

There is no reason to settle for a position that isn't a _pathway_ to what you want. That's not to say you shouldn't carry the water for people you respect. As a young apprentice, you should. And there is honor in that.


User currently offlineflipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1574 posts, RR: 0
Reply 115, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1401 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 111):
I wish someone would tell me what I need to do differently

  

I have a masters in aerospace engineering and I work in food manufacturing (and I have great fun), you don't have to silo youself, as an engineer you will have loads and loads of transferable skills. I have been doing some interviewing lately and have noticed (I was also told this when I was looking for a job after uni) that the difference in people who have a job already compared to those who are looking for that perfect job is unbelievable. The interviewer isn't going to say "How do you calculate the centre of pressure for a wing" they are far more likely to say "when have you worked as a team on a project and what did you learn".

If you want advice on looking for jobs I'm sure many on here would help you but make sure you take their advice, even if you don't like it, there are many wise people on these boards. I am not one of those wise folks yet but I hope to be some day.

Fred


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 116, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 112):
Are you the "I've been on food stamps and welfare and nobody helped me out" guy?

Nope. I don't get food stamps or welfare.

Quoting Polot (Reply 113):
And if you make that clear to a company you will never get a job.

Obviously you wouldn't say that in the interview.

Quoting Polot (Reply 113):
Especially if you have no plans to get a graduate degree.

I plan to, but I'd be stupid to pay for it myself. At best, I'm buying a cow when I could get milk for free and at worst it's throwing good money after bad.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 114):
Spending 2 years on a team that respects you & your valuable skills is worth spending 10 years on a team that won't promote you and treats you like shit.

Exactly. That's one nice thing about school: constant progress. I have a pretty strong "up or out" feeling about anything. Whenever I do something there's kind of a clock counting down until I either move up or lose patience and look to move somewhere else.

Quoting Flighty (Reply 114):
That's not to say you shouldn't carry the water for people you respect.

I have no problem doing that for a bit. But it will get old quick.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19724 posts, RR: 58
Reply 117, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 111):
I don't think that's true. I'm hearing about there being well over a thousand applications for some positions.

You may think that the sky is red, but it's blue. There is a shortage of American workers with scientific educations.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 118, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1408 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 111):
I wish someone would tell me what I need to do differently,

You have GOT to be kidding me.

No, really.

Because I alone have posted about a dozen things you need to do differently, and you've shot down EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, claiming it's "beneath you" to have to actually do some work, or that "humility is overrated".

Shut up, and go out and get a job. No whining, no excuses, none of this "overqualified" bullshit. Hell, if you're so smart, start your own business. Why bother working for someone who's just gonna fire you anyways, right?

But seriously, get off your high horse, and go out and get a freakin job. You are not the best engineer this world has ever seen. You are not even close. You are barely in your 20s with a degree that still has wet ink on it. Stop acting like you're God's gift to the engineering world.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 119, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1411 times:

Quoting flipdewaf (Reply 115):
I have a masters in aerospace engineering and I work in food manufacturing (and I have great fun), you don't have to silo youself, as an engineer you will have loads and loads of transferable skills.

I know that. There are the jobs I've applied, the jobs I'd be really good at, and the jobs I'd actually want. The second group is a subset of the first, and the third a subset of the second.

But there's an enormous disconnect between not getting serious looks and all the people I know in the industry who seem to think that my qualifications are more than sufficient. If one of them said I need another degree or to go take this class or that class, it would be great. But nobody has any reason why I've failed.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 120, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1411 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 108):
I worked hard and I'm not going to apologize for it or lower myself to a position I'm overqualified for.

When I hear this, I hear "I worked hard, and now I'm entitled to the position of my choice."

These are the most fun interviews for me to conduct because I already know the outcome when this person shows up in my office.



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlinestratosphere From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 1653 posts, RR: 4
Reply 121, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1405 times:

Quoting aloges (Reply 112):
What the hell?! Are you the "I've been on food stamps and welfare and nobody helped me out" guy?

Ive never been on welfare or food stamps either. My brother and his girlfriend are though. And I see them abusing it too. Looking to sell their food stamp balance for 50 cents on the dollar. Thats why I voted against Obama. My own brother is an abuser so I know most everyone abuses that hand out. I know there some who need it but most abuse that privilege.

[Edited 2012-11-07 17:25:02]


NWA THE TRUE EVIL EMPIRE
User currently offlinealoges From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 8707 posts, RR: 42
Reply 122, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 118):
Shut up, and go out and get a job. No whining, no excuses, none of this "overqualified" bullshit.

Unless he's actually told that he's "hopelessly overqualified" for something (I bet I'm not the only one who's heard that), you're a hundred percent correct.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 119):
There are the jobs I've applied, the jobs I'd be really good at, and the jobs I'd actually want.

If you really believe that you can make all of these judgements at the age of 16 to 20 (as per your profile) and before you've even started working in the real world, you're delusional. Full stop. I'm several years older than you and keep discovering activities, jobs and opportunities that I didn't even dream of this time last year, or the year before that and so on. This is a world of more than six billion people, for Christ's sake!

[Edited 2012-11-07 17:28:01]


Walk together, talk together all ye peoples of the earth. Then, and only then, shall ye have peace.
User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4626 posts, RR: 2
Reply 123, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 119):
But there's an enormous disconnect between not getting serious looks and all the people I know in the industry who seem to think that my qualifications are more than sufficient. If one of them said I need another degree or to go take this class or that class, it would be great. But nobody has any reason why I've failed.

If your qualifications are sufficient, and they are interviewing for a job, and you are still not getting one offered, then there is an issue with something you are bringing , or are not bringing to the table.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlineltbewr From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13115 posts, RR: 12
Reply 124, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1407 times:

It is an interesting argument as to why Obama won. Some would say that Romney lost more than Obama won, but Romney did come within 2% of ousting an incumbent and seriously flawed President. The results of this election round suggests Americans want a slightly right-Center government. I have heard and read a number of comments to assemble my opinion her. I must say up front, I am a very loyal Democrat for over 40 years.

To me Romney made too many serious and well documented misstatements (the auto bailout, on FEMA, the '47%') . He had too many very rich, radical right, anti worker and pro-corporate supporters (Koch Brothers, Adelson and others) that turned off some voters. That he woudn't consider moderately higher tax rates on the rich turned off a few more. A few too many other Republicans candidates down-ticket, especially a few Senate candidates that had offensive and wierd ideas turned off some voters, especially women. Latinos rejected Romney and many Republicans over his and the party's harsh immigrations policies.

In the end, enough independent voters felt that Romney, to use a commentator's term, didn't show empathy with the middle classes while Obama could to some extent and were not willing to move from Obama to Romney.


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 125, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 117):
You may think that the sky is red, but it's blue. There is a shortage of American workers with scientific educations.

I'm just saying what I heard. Job posting was up for a week and over a thousand applications.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 118):
Because I alone have posted about a dozen things you need to do differently, and you've shot down EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM, claiming it's "beneath you" to have to actually do some work,

Why the hell would I take one of the jobs that I worked hard and spent a lot of money to avoid having to do?

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 118):
Hell, if you're so smart, start your own business.

I'd put it at even money that eventually I'll get fed up enough with something and do that. But it's not the best option for a 22 year old.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 118):
You are not the best engineer this world has ever seen. You are not even close. You are barely in your 20s with a degree that still has wet ink on it. Stop acting like you're God's gift to the engineering world.

I have no problem proving myself and I'm not afraid to bet on myself, but making sandwiches doesn't prove anything.

Quoting D L X (Reply 120):
When I hear this, I hear "I worked hard, and now I'm entitled to the position of my choice."

Why should I be interested in a position that leads nowhere, or at least not where I want to go? That's just a waste of time.

Quoting aloges (Reply 122):
If you really believe that you can make all of these judgements at the age of 16 to 20 (as per your profile) and before you've even started working in the real world, you're delusional. Full stop.

I'm not under the impression that I'll have to keep the job forever. I'd probably not keep it more than a few years.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 123):
If your qualifications are sufficient, and they are interviewing for a job, and you are still not getting one offered, then there is an issue with something you are bringing , or are not bringing to the table.

I just looked and my interview rate is roughly 3% of my applications. That's what happens when there's a thousand applicants per job.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 124):
It is an interesting argument as to why Obama won. Some would say that Romney lost more than Obama won, but Romney did come within 2% of ousting an incumbent and seriously flawed President

I'd say that's accurate. He didn't grab enough of the middle.

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 124):
To me Romney made too many serious and well documented misstatements (the auto bailout, on FEMA, the '47%') . He had too many very rich, radical right, anti worker and pro-corporate supporters (Koch Brothers, Adelson and others) that turned off some voters.

   He focused too much on things that weren't the economy.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 126, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
The idea that one of the purposes of the goverment is to create jobs by buying/subsidizing stuff, including military procurement, is a perversion

The harsh reality is that government spending generates jobs in the private sector. Doesn't matter if it is a bridge or battleship.

What I don't know, but would love to see, is how many tax dollars are received from $1 in government spending? I'm talking about both direct and indirect tax revenues. My bet is that it is pretty much a wash when you get down to it.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
In fact I am on record here of proposing that the US Air Force buy some EuroFighters, Gripens and Sukhois, in order to shake up Lockheed and Boeing from their complacency.

That is a perversion. I doubt you'd be willing to have your taxes increased to cover the shortfall from Lockheed and Boeing and their employees and their suppliers. I'm certainly not.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 73):
Now tax deductions and rules which allow you to get a larger tax refund than the income tax you paid in, 100% that is a bribe - welfare handouts in disguise.

I'll assume you are talking about the GOP Socialist $1,000 per child per year handout.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others? Seems like the government picking winners and losers.

Actually, the government can, at times, decide to act to save jobs, or major companies. They did it with Chrysler before. Loan guarantees and a nice, plump $350 million PROFIT for the $1.5 Billion guarantee. Looking at the subsequent man years of employment and tax revenues that guarantee delivered it seems to have been a very wise decision - regardless of who much the purist conservatives screamed.

Link for the $350 million: http://uspolitics.about.com/od/economy/a/chryslerBailout.htm

Looks like we are seeing the same benefits starting to come in from President Obama's actions - again leaving the purist conservatives flopping around in misery.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 83):
So what about GM and Chrysler makes their employees so damn special that my money has to save their jobs and not others? Seems like the government picking winners and losers.

It does kill conservatives to see these bailouts be so successful. They were spewing back in the late 790s when the government guaranteed and they spewed when the government made a $350 million profit.

Personally I consider it good government when efforts are made to retina the general welfare of a area of the country that would be hit with hard unemployment without intervention at some level or other.


User currently offlineJakeOrion From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1253 posts, RR: 2
Reply 127, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 1404 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 118):
But seriously, get off your high horse, and go out and get a freakin job. You are not the best engineer this world has ever seen. You are not even close. You are barely in your 20s with a degree that still has wet ink on it. Stop acting like you're God's gift to the engineering world.

Then you fail to understand the true situation. I personally know 7 out of 10 people with degrees that are either unemployed or underemployed. They are working extremely hard at finding employment but are coming up short. So, here's the rob: many of you say get an education to get a well paying job, then when somebody complains when they have the education and are unable to get a job, you state underemployment. If I may ask, how does this logic work? What was the point of obtaining a degree?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 119):
But there's an enormous disconnect between not getting serious looks and all the people I know in the industry who seem to think that my qualifications are more than sufficient. If one of them said I need another degree or to go take this class or that class, it would be great. But nobody has any reason why I've failed.

Most likely lack of experience. Fresh out of school and a big question mark. I know it isn't right, but when there are many more experienced applicants, it makes the hiring process that much harder.

Quoting D L X (Reply 120):
When I hear this, I hear "I worked hard, and now I'm entitled to the position of my choice."

But you're also saying, "Working hard will achieve nothing."

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 124):
In the end, enough independent voters felt that Romney, to use a commentator's term, didn't show empathy with the middle classes while Obama could to some extent and were not willing to move from Obama to Romney.

Personally, aside from my earlier post, overall, he wasn't Charismatic. He took a stance of talking down to you rather than at you.



Every problem has a simple solution; finding the simple solution is the difficult problem.
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 128, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1397 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 125):
Why the hell would I take one of the jobs that I worked hard and spent a lot of money to avoid having to do?

Because people that are older, wiser, and have more experience than you or your classmates are telling you to. But you're far too arrogant to accept that.

I'm not trying to argue the point with you. I, and others, are literally telling you how to be successful, and you want to argue about it! As if you somehow have some magical insight into getting a job that the rest of us peasants don't have. You simply cannot admit that you are making mistakes, and thus you will never fix those mistakes and improve.

Just because you throw money at something doesn't entitle you avoid having to temporarily do work that is "beneath" you.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 125):
I just looked and my interview rate is roughly 3% of my applications. That's what happens when there's a thousand applicants per job.

No, that's what happens when you send out an application and don't follow up on it. That's what happens when you don't network and just think that hiring managers are going to be impressed with your self-described skill and an expensive degree but no job history and zero real-world experience in anything.

And when you do get the rare interview, your complete and utter arrogance, self-centerdness, lack of loyalty, and sense of entitlement shows all over you, and they know that you're not the kind of person they want.

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 127):
many of you say get an education to get a well paying job

It definitely is a prerequisite, but that doesn't mean it's the only thing you need. What BMI has is a good (if horrendously overpriced) education, but he is severely lacking in both motivation, networking, and general people skills. Also:

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 127):
an education

Is not the same as:

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 127):
obtaining a degree
Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 127):

But you're also saying, "Working hard will achieve nothing."

No he's not. The part, "I worked hard", is sarcasm. Just because you think you've worked hard doesn't mean you have And what we're trying to explain to BMI is that not only has he not worked hard enough, he refuses to work anymore because HE feels he's done enough.

And then when he doesn't get his dream job, he comes to a thread like this and blames it all on Obama and his handling of the economy. His criticism of the bailouts is just a reflection of his own failures and frustrations that nobody is ever going to bail him out.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 129, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1393 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 88):
Unemployed, and from what I've heard, a lot of it has to do with governmental wrangling over budgets and a large swath of politicians looking to slash defense spending while bailing out companies that have legitimately run themselves out of business.

Okay, so you're willing to put some responsibility for your bad situation on the government. If you should manage to land a job in the defense field, would you be willing to give the government some of the credit?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
I don't expect it to be supported as a jobs program, it should be supported because it's needed.

We don't need massive military spending right now. And we certainly can't afford it right now.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
I don't need the government to provide everything, but it's ridiculous to see them taking care of pretty much every group but mine.

There are a lot of groups of people the government isn't taking care of. That's life.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 92):
Like I've said before, who creates more jobs? Trailer trash single moms or people with engineering degrees?

Do car companies not employ lots of people with engineering degrees? You've catalogued the government support in that sector, why not try for a job there?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 125):
Why the hell would I take one of the jobs that I worked hard and spent a lot of money to avoid having to do?

Because sometimes that's what people have to do when things don't go exactly their way but they still have to make a living. That's reality. You certainly wouldn't be the only one in that situation.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 130, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1394 times:

Quoting JakeOrion (Reply 127):
Most likely lack of experience. Fresh out of school and a big question mark. I know it isn't right, but when there are many more experienced applicants, it makes the hiring process that much harder

That's what seems to be the case.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
I'm not trying to argue the point with you. I, and others, are literally telling you how to be successful, and you want to argue about it!

Making sandwiches or sweeping floors will do literally nothing to make me successful or get me closer to where I want to be. I could have been doing that for four years already and not have spend a boatload of money.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
No, that's what happens when you send out an application and don't follow up on it.

It's all online now, so there's usually nobody to follow up with.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
And when you do get the rare interview, your complete and utter arrogance, self-centerdness, lack of loyalty, and sense of entitlement shows all over you, and they know that you're not the kind of person they want.

I'm not dumb enough to show it, but I'm not about to do some "aw shucks, I'm just happy to be here act" to get a job. It's not about being at the game, it's about being in the game.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
What BMI has is a good (if horrendously overpriced) education, but he is severely lacking in both motivation, networking, and general people skills. Also:

I have the motivation. I'm always one of the first in - last out types. And now I have more motivation than ever to make people who doubted me look stupid. Networking I'll admit is a necessary evil. It's the stupidest thing ever, but I do it anyway. But, when people tell me my qualifications are great yet there's no jobs for me, it's utterly pointless.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
And what we're trying to explain to BMI is that not only has he not worked hard enough, he refuses to work anymore because HE feels he's done enough.

All of the people I've talked to in industry say I've done plenty. I went to school, I got the grades, I got the degree, I got other experience and it's all worthless. I did the stuff I was supposed to do and got nothing for it. My degree isn't worth the paper it's printed on at this point.

I want to say that it was worth it, but if anyone were to make a case to the contrary, I couldn't offer a single number to back up my point.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
And then when he doesn't get his dream job, he comes to a thread like this and blames it all on Obama and his handling of the economy. His criticism of the bailouts is just a reflection of his own failures and frustrations that nobody is ever going to bail him out.

I never blamed the whole thing on Obama. Recessions happen, that's just part of the deal. But, I'm still wondering what the GM employees did to make them more worthy than myself or any number of other workers.

Quoting Mir (Reply 129):
If you should manage to land a job in the defense field, would you be willing to give the government some of the credit?

Sure, why wouldn't I?

Quoting Mir (Reply 129):
There are a lot of groups of people the government isn't taking care of. That's life.

So what did the GM and Chrysler people do to earn their bailout?

Quoting Mir (Reply 129):
You've catalogued the government support in that sector, why not try for a job there?

You think I haven't?

[Edited 2012-11-07 19:03:25]


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 131, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1395 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 125):
Why the hell would I take one of the jobs that I worked hard and spent a lot of money to avoid having to do?

Because it shows that you'll do what is necessary to get the job done — even if it's just working an interim job to gain experience and some money in the door while the 'right' job comes along. In addition, employers want to hire people who already have a job, no matter what that job is, not someone who is just looking for a job.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 123):
If your qualifications are sufficient, and they are interviewing for a job, and you are still not getting one offered, then there is an issue with something you are bringing , or are not bringing to the table.

   I've been hired for every job where I've been called up for an interview, and meet the qualifications. The feedback I get is that it's due to how I answer goal-setting questions. "What's your goal in this job?" I answer: "To understand as quickly as possible what the priorities are, then perform my roll to get them done in a manner that allows me to walk out the door every night with a sense of accomplishment, and walk back in the next morning with a clean conscience." The interview is pretty much over at that time. I've got the job. Hasn't failed me yet.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineD L X From United States of America, joined May 1999, 11357 posts, RR: 52
Reply 132, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1394 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 128):
And then when he doesn't get his dream job, he comes to a thread like this and blames it all on Obama and his handling of the economy.

Exactly.

I'm curious who's bankrolling this unemployment of his. If I were his parents and was giving him money to "search" for a job, I'd cut off funding.

Isn't personal responsibility a big conservative mantra? (Yes it is.)



Send me a PM at http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/sendmessage.main?from_username=NULL
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 133, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1392 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
Making sandwiches or sweeping floors will do literally nothing to make me successful or get me closer to where I want to be.

Apart from giving you work experience.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
So what did the GM and Chrysler people do to earn their bailout?

What has the defense industry done to earn extra defense spending?

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
Sure, why wouldn't I?

Because you hardly ever pass up a chance to say that the government should be taking less of your hard-earned money.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlinezippyjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 5478 posts, RR: 12
Reply 134, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

Quoting pu (Thread starter):
I really hope America gets its fiscal house in order and do wish the great American people a successful future!


Pu



  

My spin in no particular order:

1. President Obama is a likable guy and the first African American POTUS and is young (as President's go)
2. Incumbency usually has it's advantages on retaining office in the White House with the exception of "Jihad Carter and Daddy Bush in my lifetime.
3. Paul Ryan though young and charismatic is Tea Party and way to the right.
4. Romney though likable came across as Ronald Reagan II but from rich folk stock.
5. GOP ran on same platform which ill suits many minorities, young people and working folk at least perception wise.
6. Draconian ideas regarding alternative energy. Sure it's still oil but GOP tends to be the party of big oil/big money.
7. Bad timing on Mitt's part. Statement about FEMA and the 47%.
8. 8 Years of George W.Bush!
9. Many feeling economy is at least stable.
10. Turn out! Before Clinton many of the groups that skew Democratic were un-registered and those registered did not turn out and vote.
11. Perception that Romney is for the rich and by the wealthy.
12. President Obama and Chris Christi working together and responding in regard to hurricane Sandy, A new and improved FEMA. Contrast this to the aftermath of Katrina.
13. Covertly: GOP Presidents of recent era have tended to nominate extreme right wing Supreme Justice candidates.
Think of Scalia and Clarence Thomas and many of the ones NOT confirmed by Congress. Nixon had two of those back to back in the day.
14. The gender gap. Many women felt the GOP would not serve their interests. And intrude when it comes to their bodies. Abortion issue.
15. Bad luck that some of the GOP candidates put their Brooks Brother's shoes up their asses with those asinine comments regarding rape.
16. Did I mention 8 years of "W"? This gets an honorable mention a second time.



I'm Zippyjet & I approve of this message!
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 135, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1396 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 131):
Because it shows that you'll do what is necessary to get the job done — even if it's just working an interim job to gain experience and some money in the door while the 'right' job comes along.

Sweeping floors does nothing to prove anything except that I could sweep floors. Experience doing something menial is a waste of time.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 131):
employers want to hire people who already have a job, no matter what that job is, not someone who is just looking for a job.

I've heard this before, but nobody has ever given a good reason why. I'm curious, not that it would make me willing to sweep floors.

Quoting D L X (Reply 132):
I'm curious who's bankrolling this unemployment of his. If I were his parents and was giving him money to "search" for a job, I'd cut off funding.

Some savings from my parents and some of my own. I want to stretch it as far as possible because I don't just need to last until I get an offer but until I get a good offer.

Quoting Mir (Reply 133):
What has the defense industry done to earn extra defense spending?

They do have to bid for work (usually, I'm not a fan of no-bid contracts). But defense spending is something that has to be done.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5648 posts, RR: 6
Reply 136, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1400 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
Making sandwiches or sweeping floors will do literally nothing to make me successful

And I've been telling you it will help for about 3 hours now, and you are STILL IGNORING IT.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):

It's all online now, so there's usually nobody to follow up with.

No, it's not "all online" now. Make phone calls, show up to the building, show them that you're interested. Otherwise, you're just one of a thousand people that was bothered enough to click a mouse.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
I'm not dumb enough to show it, but I'm not about to do some "aw shucks, I'm just happy to be here act" to get a job. It's not about being at the game, it's about being in the game.

Blah, blah, blah. Meaningless crap designed to sell tapes.

No, it shows all over you. Trust me.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
I have the motivation.

No you don't. You don't even have enough motivation to get any other job other than the one you feel you're entitled to.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
And now I have more motivation than ever to make people who doubted me look stupid

Trust me, by the time you're done with this mess (and if you come out ahead), you'll look back and say "wow, they really were right".

Nobody is doubting that you CAN do it, we just know that it's not going to happen with your current attitude.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
Networking I'll admit is a necessary evil. It's the stupidest thing ever,

Seems to me like you're slightly anti-social. Like I said, your disdain for your fellow man and the entitlement that goes with it shows all over.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
All of the people I've talked to in industry say I've done plenty. I went to school, I got the grades, I got the degree, I got other experience

They're either stupid or lying (or you're lying). You refuse to do anything more than to browse Monster.com all day in hopes someone will pick you. That's not doing plenty; that's doing nothing.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
I did the stuff I was supposed to do

NO YOU HAVEN'T. You did a lot, but you refuse to diversify your skills with any other type of employment, and you refuse to network. No, LinkedIn does not count.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 130):
But, I'm still wondering what the GM employees did to make them more worthy than myself or any number of other workers.

They didn't do anything. The bailout wasn't to save their jobs (although that was a politically helpful side-effect), it was to save dozens of other companies from folding and losing the market billions of dollars. It had nothing to do with the employees (like you said, plenty of other businesses were allowed to go under with hundreds of thousands of workers).



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 137, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1393 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 135):
I've heard this before, but nobody has ever given a good reason why. I'm curious, not that it would make me willing to sweep floors.

It shows that you're willing to do what needs getting done, even if what needs getting done is simply earning a paycheck.

Maverick623 and others have been giving you excellent advice. My lord, if I was your employer and you said the same thing to me when I asked you to do something so a project could move forward, then got the attitude you're giving to posters here with good advice, you'd get the pink slip pronto. No question about it. Harsh maybe, but truthful.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8544 posts, RR: 2
Reply 138, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1394 times:

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 137):

It shows that you're willing to do what needs getting done, even if what needs getting done is simply earning a paycheck.

Cynically speaking, sometimes a hiring manager wants an obedient little slave. (edit: speaking to BMI) You may not fit the bill. But at least act like you painfully and ridiculously humble, in order to _get the job_. It may also be seen as manipulative. But, it's better than being a young know-it-all, which is unattractive. This is social politics. Not a meritocracy. Think high school.

[Edited 2012-11-07 19:40:45]

User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 139, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
No you don't. You don't even have enough motivation to get any other job other than the one you feel you're entitled to.

I have the motivation to work for the job I want and not stop short of that or allow myself to be detoured.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
Seems to me like you're slightly anti-social.

I'll happily admit that there are a hell of a lot of people who annoy me to no end. But that hasn't kept me from working with quite a few of them.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
You did a lot, but you refuse to diversify your skills with any other type of employment, and you refuse to network.

Does cleaning things really count as diversifying skills? I can fold laundry with the best of them, if that matters.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
They're either stupid or lying (or you're lying).

I'm starting to get that idea. People might just be blowing smoke at me, if there's a class I should have taken but didn't I'd much prefer they told me. I doubt that my lack of experience washing dishes is what's holding me back.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
No, LinkedIn does not count.

I agree completely. LinkedIn is just about the most worthless thing ever. Ask for entry level jobs, get emails about jobs for people with 20 years experience in Bangalore.

Quoting Maverick623 (Reply 136):
The bailout wasn't to save their jobs (although that was a politically helpful side-effect), it was to save dozens of other companies from folding and losing the market billions of dollars.

But, weren't there plenty of other companies pulled under by those that were allowed to go under? You could make that argument for any number of companies.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 137):
It shows that you're willing to do what needs getting done, even if what needs getting done is simply earning a paycheck.

I happen to have enough savings that I don't need to lower myself to that level just do get a paycheck. It doesn't need getting done.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 137):
My lord, if I was your employer and you said the same thing to me when I asked you to do something so a project could move forward,

If I was actually getting compensated and it would actually move the project forward, I'd be perfectly inclined to do it. But getting a menial job just to kill time doesn't move anything forward.

[Edited 2012-11-07 19:44:55]


Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21637 posts, RR: 55
Reply 140, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 1396 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 135):
Sweeping floors does nothing to prove anything except that I could sweep floors.

In other words, prove that you're not too proud to do things that you don't find particularly rewarding but that need to be done. If you think that's meaningless, there's a rude awakening waiting for you.

I'm trained as a pilot, not a cabin cleaner. Yet I still pull out a vacuum from time to time and give the cabin the best cleaning I can give it with the tools available in the time allotted. Does it suck? Absolutely. Does it prove that I have good flying skills? Not in the least. Does it show that I'm willing to go the extra mile for my company? Yes. Is it rewarding? Surprisingly, yes - there is some satisfaction in a job well done, no matter how menial.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 141, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1393 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 140):
In other words, prove that you're not too proud to do things that you don't find particularly rewarding but that need to be done. If you think that's meaningless, there's a rude awakening waiting for you.

Sweeping floors if you're a pilot is going an extra mile. Sweeping floors if you're a janitor is just doing menial, unskilled work.

I have no problem going the extra mile in a decent job since it usually pays off in the end, or so I've found. Just doing average work as a janitor would be a waste of time.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 142, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1396 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 141):
Just doing average work as a janitor would be a waste of time.

This. This is why you don't have a job. This attitude probably comes across in interviews.

What you asked me to explain in your previous post you should have learned in any job-seeking class. It's becoming patently obvious you want to do this your own way, not the successful way. Good luck with that.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineNWAdeicer From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 174 posts, RR: 1
Reply 143, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1396 times:

BMI727,

Seriously, you/re parents are bankrolling you while you sit at home waiting for your dream job call? If you were my kid your ass would be coming home smelling like fries or you would be apartment hunting.

You have absolutely no clue about the working world, it's painfully obvious from reading your posts. You are going to sit there and tell me that using a broom/mop whatever is not benefitting you in any way? Working as a supervisor in toys at WalMart wouldn't help? You don't think that doing these "below you" jobs can't be turned into a positive thing in an interview or on a resume? It really doesn't sound like you have much else going on during the day, or night, for that matter. Don't you have just a little bit of guilt knowing that there are jobs out there but you would rather have your parents help you financially because these jobs are blue collar?

As others have stated you need to learn the art of talking, meeting people, asking questions. How are you going to find out that one guy down the hall, he has a friend or cousin, uncle, you name it, who has connections in the field you are wanting to make your millions. Your not going to because you refuse to lower yourself to working any entry level position, anywhere.

I'll give you a little story. Many years ago I wanted to work for this company, badly. Applied, the usual application then waiting game. After about a month I did some research and found the name of the supervisor. I got out of work at 7:00 am and drove 90 miles to the company HQ. I asked to speak to the supervisor and was told she was in meetings all day, I asked if I could wait in case she had a few minutes. I sat at that chair from 9:00 until 4:30 when she finally came out. She was stunned to learn I had worked all night and waited all day to talk to her. I was called two days later for an interview, one month later I was working for them. In the position I wanted.

You need to step off this pedestal your on, the view doesn't sound like it's to great up there.



I miss the Red Tail
User currently offlineAeroWesty From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 20640 posts, RR: 62
Reply 144, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1406 times:

— Back on topic —

Bill O'Reilly on why Romney lost:

1) Because Romney didn't challenge Obama on Libya in the third debate. If he had, the media would have been forced to challenge the President on his lack of leadership.

2) Hurricane Sandy kept Romney off the front pages for the all-important 5 days prior to the election. O'Reilly claims that in exit polls, 42% of voters cited how Obama handled the aftermath of Sandy as an important part of deciding which candidate to endorse with their vote.

3) Romney didn't bring any sense of urgency to the table while presenting the dangers of Obama continuing in office. Romney should have positioned issues in a way that casting a vote for Obama would scare the living daylights out of people.



International Homo of Mystery
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15745 posts, RR: 27
Reply 145, posted (1 year 10 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1402 times:

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 143):
Seriously, you/re parents are bankrolling you while you sit at home waiting for your dream job call?

Nobody's bankrolling me. I have savings, although I live with my parents.

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 143):
You are going to sit there and tell me that using a broom/mop whatever is not benefitting you in any way? Working as a supervisor in toys at WalMart wouldn't help? You don't think that doing these "below you" jobs can't be turned into a positive thing in an interview or on a resume?

No, there's nothing positive about that. It's just killing time to maybe get a job that I could be getting anyway, since menial jobs don't add anything substantive to my skills.

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 143):
Don't you have just a little bit of guilt knowing that there are jobs out there but you would rather have your parents help you financially because these jobs are blue collar?

It might come down to a situation where I have to take a blue collar job that I hate. And every minute of it will suck horrendously. But, until that time comes, I'm willing to be my savings on my skills and training. And, if it looks like that might happen, more education is probably a much better option. If I strike out, I'd better come back with a bigger bat.

Quoting NWAdeicer (Reply 143):
Your not going to because you refuse to lower yourself to working any entry level position, anywhere.

I'm more than willing to do entry level work in my field. I have no interest in menial entry level work that's below my qualification level. I didn't put in the time, money and effort to flip burgers.