Newt is going to give us $2.50/gallon gas!!

1. 92

   habeeposted 12 years ago

   Yeah, right. I just got an email asking for a donation to Newt so that we can all have cheap gas if the Newtster is elected.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Any politician who promises cheaper gas is 100% full of crap. The price of oil, a commodity, in the US is determined by a number of factors, the BS in the Miidle East (iran right now) and the stock market to name a few. Politicians has no say in it.

      replyreport
      1. 85

         Stacie Lposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Didn't Bachman promise $2.00 a gallon if she were elected?
         I guess inflation has to be counted.

         replyreport
         1. 92

            habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            
            
            Ya know, I could see a pol promising to lower or attempting to lower overall gas prices, but to cite a specific dollar amount??

            replyreport
      2. 61

         KFlippinposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Oh, but powerful politicians can certainly influence its rise by their policies and attitude or lack thereof - not to mention the cruci'fiction' of the value of the dollar.
         
         And now that I think about it, how interesting to view a politician's words regarding cheaper gass as '100% full of crap', that would be applicable across all parties.

         replyreport
   2. 63

      Ralph Deedsposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      And a colony on the moon!

      replyreport
      1. 92

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         Hey, maybe the moon has vast stores of oil that we don't know about! Newt must be a genius!

         replyreport
   3. 61

      ackman1465posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yes.... .and it won't rain in Indianapolis when the Summer comes...
      
      .... and there's no such thing as Mother Goose, Disneyland and Dr Seuss....
      
      C'mon people...... wake up!!!!

      replyreport
      1. 92

         habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         And God didn't make little green apples? lol

         replyreport
   4. 0

      Sooner28posted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Yay.  I am voting for Newt then!

      replyreport
2. 79

   Uninvited Writerposted 12 years ago

   Is he selling swampland too?
   
   Who knows, maybe he's made a deal with OPEC

   replyreport
   1. 92

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well, there IS a lot of swampland in GA. lol

      replyreport
3. 60

   Evan G Rogersposted 12 years ago

   Ron Paul can give you 20 cent per gallon gas.
   
   A silver dime is worth $2.50.
   
   BOOM -Gingrichfail.

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      And 1.75 per hour wages
      
      And sweat shops
      
      And back alley abortions
      
      And Wal-Mart cops
      
      and.....
      
      Yay Ron Paul!!!!

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         You really missed the point.d
         
         OH well, you do that a lot.

         replyreport
         1. 60

            Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            I guess about 98% of the American people miss it too since they will also not be voting for your Saint Paul.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               I love how you've given up saying anything constructive on these forums.
               
               Every time I see your name, I know it's a worthless post.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  And yet you waste your time anyway; much as a Ron Paul supporter wastes his vote.

                  replyreport
               2. 79

                  Uninvited Writerposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Um...that is such a case of the kettle calling the pot black...

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     What a negative thing to say
                     
                     Do pots ever call kettles white?

                     replyreport
4. 60

   knolyourselfposted 12 years ago

   How exactly is he going to get two-fifty gas by attacking Iran or going to the moon?

   replyreport
   1. 60

      Paul Wingertposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Maybe he's thinking we can start drilling on the moon for oil!

      replyreport
5. 86

   rebekahELLEposted 12 years ago

   How do people honestly believe this kind of stuff?
   
   chuckles ~ flashback to summer 2008 `
   
   "no president can lower or raise the price of gas, it is market price"
   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UzEnK'BA … embedded#!
   watch all of it for the 'full effect' of irony

   replyreport
6. 60

   Paul Wingertposted 12 years ago

   If we start drilling here in the US, what makes people think that the oil companies will sell oil cheaper than the going rate coming from over seas? Companies have one purpose in life and that is to make a profit.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Heck, we've been exporting oil! Our oil exports jumped way up in 2010.
      
      http://www.indexmundi.com/united_states … ports.html
      
      This Reuters article tells us why our gas prices are going up: we're exporting our oil.
      
      http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/ … Y120120312
      
      Of course, it also says that if we try to limit oil exports, prices will still go up, so I'm not sure what the writer is thinking, really.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Thank god they want a profit, otherwise there would be no gas.
      
      Gas only costs 16 cents if you use silver.

      replyreport
      1. 60

         Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

         or .18 beaver pelts...

         replyreport
         1. 70

            Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               It makes as much sense as using silver as a currency.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  No, actually it really doesn't. I have an article explaining why

                  replyreport
         2. 60

            Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

            You fail to understand how money works.
            
            Please do not insult the study of important things. You sound like a creationist insulting evolution because alligators and crocodiles are different species.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

               
               
               My money works just fine thank you.  What I have trouble comprehending is anyone over the age of 12 who listens to libertarian drivel and takes it seriously.

               replyreport
               1. 60

                  Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Point #1: You voted for a Libertarian Candidate. You've just nullified all of your arguments. Good job on that.
                  
                  Point #2: Money is independent of libertarian belief, so your statement has yet to disprove anything, even if it were true.
                  
                  Point #3: Your money has lost about 98% of its value since 1913. Your money does not work fine. About 20% since 2000.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     My money has not lost any value whatsoever.  The money I had in 2000 was sufficient to purchase a certain amount of goods and services.  The money I have in 2012 is sufficient to purchase a greater amount of goods and sevices.  See, I have a job and....
                     
                     I'm sorry, I just lost you didn't I?

                     replyreport
                  2. 70

                     Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Point #4: Evan's $0.16/gallon gas doesn't represent an economic recovery. It just represents the pump-price if we were using silver coinage. Everything else would likewise seem a lot cheaper if you only look at the superficial prices of goods and services.
                     
                     But it's important to remember that at the same time, your take-home pay would likewise be reduced (if you make  $50K/year, for example, you'd be getting about $2K/year).
                     
                     So things wouldn't really be any different. We'd be paying about the same percentage of our income on gas, on food, on housing, etc. Stuff wouldn't actually be cheaper; the only difference would be that all the numbers (wages as well as prices) would be lower.
                     
                     That's how money works.

                     replyreport
                     1. 60

                        Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                        If we use silver as money, we see clearly that the price of things are going down.
                        
                        I said nothing about an economic recovery. This is because we're not experiencing one. I merely commented that Montgomery doesn't understand how money works. I've stopped reading his comments (I got tricked the last few times because he keeps changing his avatar. Apparently he can't pick a team he likes).
                        
                        Indeed, salaries would be lower using silver. But we would no longer have a "I need to be investing in the stock market or I will lose my wealth" mentality. The current system requires people to be speculators JUST to retain their wealth. This is disgusting, and a natural symptom of inflation.
                        
                        Thing WOULD be different: no more speculation mandates; people on fixed incomes would not lose money day in and day out; booms and busts would largely be unheard of; and we wouldn't be in so many wars.
                        
                        Your fourth point is an important one, but you didn't go far enough.
                        
                        As is almost always true, you know more than the average hubber. You simply don't go far enough.

                        replyreport
                        1. 60

                           Ron Montgomeryposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           So in other words, when your argument is shown to be total nonsense, you claim you were making a different argument, or go to the "dirty tricks" defense.  How very Rush Limbaugh of you.

                           replyreport
                        2. 70

                           Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                           I said nothing about an economic recovery.
                           
                           True, but it would be easy for someone who doesn't fully get how money works to jump from "Gas at $0.16/gallon" to "Happy days are here again."
                           
                           booms and busts would largely be unheard of;
                           Because booms and busts were largely unheard of when we were on the gold standard--except they weren't. The gold standard on its own will not prevent boom/bust cycles, and surely won't prevent  economic collapses. That last great big one happened before we dropped the gold standard and before the regulation of the financial markets. Interestingly, it didn't really take long after the regulations were rolled back for another bubble to form and pop....
                           
                           and we wouldn't be in so many wars.
                           Because we never engaged in foreign military intervention when we were on the gold standard--except we did: all over Central America, at the behest of the Dole family among others (which is where the term Banana Republic comes from).
                           
                           Your fourth point is an important one, but you didn't go far enough.
                           I'm intrigued. What's the next logical step after prices and wages all get smaller?

                           replyreport
                           1. 60

                              Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                              "True, but it would be easy for someone who doesn't fully get how money works to jump from "Gas at $0.16/gallon" to "Happy days are here again.""
                              
                              I actually don't see how that's accurate.
                              
                              Booms and busts did happen on the gold standard, but, last I checked there was never 2 in 7 years under a gold standard. A gold standard would hinder booms and busts quite a bit because bank runs would be a valid method of keeping inflation in check.
                              
                              The war issue: We've been in nonstop warfare since we abandoned the gold standard. I stand firm on this statement.
                              
                              Prices and wages: with inflation being the norm, people can't simply hold on to their money to retain wealth. People have to become speculators (despite having no real understanding of how to do so properly) to just break even. In addition to this, elderly and other individuals on fixed incomes get screwed over. And, in addition to this, rampant unchecked warfare becomes the norm with a paper money. And, in addition to this, booms and busts are much more common.
                              
                              Those would be the logical conclusions that you didn't mention.

                              replyreport
               2. 61

                  KFlippinposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                  Glad to hear your money works fine these days, I'm guessing you didn't lose and never recover from the market collapse, good for you, have a Union pension do you?, and kindly share with us whose drivel you do take seriously these days? 
                  
                  Except for some clearly unacceptable (to me) positions of Ron Paul in the war/defense areas, many seem to find him a good candidate, most of whom are youngsters.  That I find interesting, and even though I am not a Paul voter/supporter, I'd never dream of insulting them by calling their support akin to 'drivel'. 
                  
                  Ron Paul's unexpected support in the polls should be made note of by any legit candidate of either major Party for the office of the Presidency, as well as everyone else. The Banty Rooster (my own term for him) has hit a home run with lots of young folks....maybe that 'reason' should be explored and somebody somewhere would learn something about modern day America and the more 'thinking and realist' kiddos that will come to a fruition of political power in the generations to come.

                  replyreport
                  1. 60

                     Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

                     Everyone has lost since the market crash: that's my entire point.
                     
                     Our money has lost some 15% of its value since 2006!! Of course I'm losing out. So are you.
                     
                     You don't like Ron Paul's foreign policy, eh? Maybe this will change your mind:
                     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy3KDYE5KQE
                     
                     It matters not if anyone "investigates" why people love Ron Paul so much, the people of the revolution can sniff out fakes with no problem. The only way another person could earn my vote is if they had a 10+ year history of a free-market voting history.
                     
                     There ain't many out there with the credentials.

                     replyreport
7. 0

   idratherbeposted 12 years ago

   Between Newt promising lower gas prices and Romney promising the world with no plan of action yet, I couldn't imagine anyone voting Republican. And with all the bills attacking (over 1100 this year) women's health care and women's rights in general. I can't imagine anyone voting Republican. Unless of course at the last minute they come up with a Real Candidate!

   replyreport
   1. 77

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Not to mention, a war with Iran.
      They all bow to Bibi.
      Work for him IMO.(except for Paul)

      replyreport
8. 80

   writinginalaskaposted 12 years ago

   Yeah right!  When pigs fly!   But really why stop there??   How about .99 cent per gal gas???   I mean come on!   Does he really think we are so stupid to beleive the president has any control of gas prices??

   replyreport
   1. 77

      lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      Well yes....the Republican candidates are blaming Obama. Even blaming him for stuff Bush did. So yes--they think we are stupid,IMO.(except for Paul)

      replyreport
9. 83

   I am DB Cooperposted 12 years ago

   What's really amazing about this claim is that Newt actually showed his work and broke down where the extra oil was going to come from and how much could be produced per day. For example, I think he said Keystone XL would give us an extra 40,000 barrels/day. In total, the Newt-approved drilling and pipeline projects would give us 150,000 - 200,000 extra barrels per day. The United States uses 19 million barrels per day, so Newt's increased supply plan would only help meet 1% of our demand. Somehow this would drop the price of a gallon of gas nearly 40%.
   
   All of this assumes that approving these drilling projects would instantly produce more oil. They wouldn't. Some would take over a decade to reach full production, years after even a two-term President Gingrich would have moved out of the White House.
   
   I've heard that Newt is now running TV ads across the South making this $2.50/gallon claim. The South always seems to get the most ridiculous campaign lies, while those above the Mason-Dixon get stuck with the boring health care debate. Back in 2000, I had never heard any of those rumors about John McCain's illegitimate black baby until I visited friends in Florida. Down there it seemed like it was the major campaign issue. Living up north in 2004, I think I saw maybe one or two Swiftboat ads that were actually during a commercial break. The rest I saw in news reports about the Swiftboat ads and whether or not they were fair. Dirty politics is a form of entertainment, and right now I'm bored to death.

   replyreport
   1. 92

      habeeposted 12 years agoin reply to this

      The McCain rumor began with the SC primary, thanks to Karl Rove, the evil genius.

      replyreport
10. 62

    peanutroasterposted 12 years ago

    Oil is a finite resource.  As the world economy ramps up, every country is fighting for that finite resource.  It was high gas prices that touched of last recession.  Now that the economy is recovering, gas prices are raising.  This Yo Yo effect is our future until we get off our addition to oil.
    
    The easy, cheap oil of our parents generation is gone. Now we are looking to burning natural gas to defrost the frozen tundra in Canada to sponge out some of the last remaining deposits. 
    
    To top it off if the oil continues to burn, gas prices will be mute because the plant will be uninhabitable.

    replyreport
    1. 77

       lovemychrisposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Which is why we need alternatives! Which...WHO are trying to prevent?
       
       Mr Koch....10 years fighting a wind-farm in court.....so guess what? It's not going to happen...but who precipitates gas and oil polluting all around the world?
       
       That's right...Mr Koch.
       
       Gingrich campaign promises 2 things, IMO: higher cost of living and war with Iran.

       replyreport
11. 61

    ackman1465posted 12 years ago

    The entire fossil-fuel picture is really pretty amusing.... Consider this riddle:
    
    If you find yourself low of fuel while driving on an expressway.... you might exhaust your supply of gas at any moment ... what is the smartest way to proceed? .... to go FASTER, to get to a gas-station SOONER? ... or, drive still slower, in the belief that your car will burn LESS GAS at that slower pace? ... BUT, you'll have to be patient, as you'll drive slower, longer...
    
    The answer is the latter, of course... and there's plenty of quantifiable details to explain it....
    
    BUT, back to amusing.... I see us HUMANS as the one(s) with the low fuel supply (the Earth's supply of fossil fuels is, after all, finite)... and many people are proposing that we race like crazy to find those last supplies - wherever they are - and burn THEM.... overlooking that, ultimately, our "tank" will go empty!!!!
    
    We will be wise to morph/adjust our means of making electricity (the "real" power, after all) to some other source besides fossil fuels.   We can do so in a measured, deliberate manner, over time.... OR, we can do so in haste, maybe even in chaos, under the impending threat of our running out of fossil fuels altogether....
    
    Fuel prices (the original subject of this thread) are strictly subject to market considerations.... and "the market" these days, is much more of "the World" competing for the available crude than was the case 20, 50 or 75 years ago.... The price at the pump reflects THAT.... and EVERY PROSPECTIVE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WHO CLAIMS THAT HE HAS THE "SECRET PLAN" TO REDUCE GASOLINE PRICES AT THE PUMP is deluding himself and hoping, as well, to delude you!!!!!

    replyreport
12. 62

    peanutroasterposted 12 years ago

    The real problem is education.  The GOP courts the dumbest American's to vote against their own interests.  Using social hot button issues the GOP can get poor American's to vote for a party that services the rich and corporations.  In a recent poll - Most GOP voters in Miss. and Alal, believe Obama is a Muslim.  No wonder the GOP likes to gut education.

    replyreport
    1. 60

       Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

       No, the real problem is inflation.
       
       Gas only costs 16 cents if you use silver coins.

       replyreport
       1. 70

          Jeff Berndtposted 12 years agoin reply to this

          And you'd only earn about $3,000/year in silver coins if you make $75,000/year in today's dollars, so there's really no functional difference at all.

          replyreport
          1. 60

             Evan G Rogersposted 12 years agoin reply to this

             For anyone else reading Jeff's comments, I addressed them above.
             
             There is a functional difference, it's just harder to see than raw numbers and aggregates.

             replyreport
    2. 61

       ackman1465posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       AND.... our buddy, Santorum, points out that wanting to send more kids to college is "snobbish"...... and is really just a ruse to get more of them (young people) to buy in to the socialist agenda.......

       replyreport
13. 52

    Kadmielsposted 12 years ago

    I truly doubt has the clout or the political power to lower gas prices..

    replyreport
    1. 61

       ackman1465posted 12 years agoin reply to this

       Please listen to me.... NO PRESIDENT.... NO "energy Czar" ... no NOBODY is going to have substantial impact on the price of gas (EXCEPT and UNLESS it is Jesus Christ.... and He REALLY exists.... and chooses to come BACK TO EARTH......)
       
       Let's all agree that ANY argument put forth by ANY so-called "Presidential candidate or wannabe" that he (or, she) is "going to lower gas prices")...is simply specious.... and STUPID..... and isn't worth ANY consideration....

       replyreport
       1. 61

          ackman1465posted 12 years agoin reply to this

          Just a P.S. to clarify:   IF Jesus DOES return to Earth, you just KNOW he will come to the USofA, America and see to it that we have infinite gasoline supplies.... and low/no cost.... since He favors us over all the other people on this Earth....   I know that because all of Jerry Falwell, Pat Robinson, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Father Carey TOLD me so!!!......

          replyreport
14. 0

    idratherbeposted 12 years ago

    All the news programs back when Bush had prices over $4.00 a gallon said the President can't control gas prices. Even Fox News made those statements, including Hannity and O'Reilly. So why all the attacks on President Obama saying he should do something when all know he can't? The spin on both sides of the aisle never cease to amaze me! Oil production right now in the US is at decade highs and consumption down, compared to the last decade. But here again, the spin continues.

    replyreport