The guy thinks that Presidents don't interfere with labor disputes, and you're still conversing with him? Maybe he'll deliver a package to your house someday for $50/hour.
Pretentiousness, statistical analysis, whatever. Numbers are important. However, any use of statistics have to pass the smell test. That poll doesn't to me.
Link me up where President Reagan took away $2 an hour from a labor dispute and you have a point. President isn't going to but into a labor dispute and make a say of whats going to happen in wage increases. Broader issues, sure. Wage increases through a contract and I call BS.
You can't see the pretentiousness in 'wrapping my head around a concept'? You, are as delusional as I thought. Not a very good representation for the Republican party.
Well, seems like the Republican's on this board are conceding. Lets wrap up the Obama satire and start focusing on Blazer season.
I don't see it as pretentious. I see it as speaking directly. You haven't shown yourself to understand nuance. As for being a representative of the GOP, since I'm not a member, I don't know why I should care.
He's up by a few points. There is no way Obama would be spending this much time there if he was confident of carrying the state again. 4k just laid off in the coal industry today, by the way, and that's not reflected in the OH polls.
1 in every 8 jobs in Ohio are associated with the auto industry. I think Obama has Ohio in his back pocket. Its Florida he has to worry about.
My buddy lives in Cleveland, is a registered Republican and told me that he's seen so much negative advertising by the Obama campaign, at times he actually thinks Romney may be the devil. Obama is spending time in OH, because without it, Romney's road to 270 is very difficult.
Don't discount the fracking issue in OH. They have a couple of deposits in Central OH that could provide a TON of new jobs.
who said anything about not being liked? Just because we disagree and joke around with each other means we don't like each other? I have no reason to dislike you btw, yesterday morning (and I'm being generous and not counting the denny thread about not smoking) is not a 'few days'.
I think so, too. (For those interested, Reagan intervened in labor disputes more than once, PATCO traffic controllers being the most famous). http://articles.latimes.com/1987-01-29/news/mn-2213_1_long-island-rail-road-workers Reagan Acts to Halt New York Rail Strike WASHINGTON — President Reagan on Wednesday signed legislation ordering striking Long Island Rail Road workers back on the job, meaning service could be restored for the line's 112,000 commuters within 48 hours. With some reservations, Reagan signed a resolution rushed through Congress a day earlier that requires the workers to return to their jobs for 60 days, a "cooling off" period that is designed to help union and railroad negotiators reach a settlement. "The urgency with which this legislation was passed reflects the enormous hardship visited upon the communities served by the Long Island Rail Road that has been caused by the current strike," Reagan said in a written statement. However, Reagan questioned whether the government should intervene in the labor dispute, noting that federal railway labor law was supposed to be invoked only if a strike threatened "essential transportation services." "Characterizing the shutdown of the Long Island Rail Road as a threat to essential transportation services could have the undesirable effect of requiring federal involvement in the future in a multitude of local disputes which should be settled by collective bargaining," Reagan said. (this last sentence being pretty important, IMO)
