This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Obama vs Romney
Who would you vote for?
Obama?
Romney?
Why?
Please, expose your posture and convince me and the rest of our colleagues.
Topics:
Obama Obama vs Romney Romney
pat gilbert 50+
Bruno Carre
In Europe there is a big cliché about Dems and Reps, and this helps to nuance that.
@Edward
I really don't believe electing a President is choosing a future. It seems to me that if the US do not have both a president and a congress on the same side, Congress will block every measure promoted by the president and vice versa.
Next to that, I'm always interested in the idea of the Free World by some US citizens. It's true that the power of the US to act on the international scene remains IMHO unmatched, but US action abroad is no longer black & white. It was for WWII, wasn't for Vietnam, was in a way for Koweit (although do not tell me it was to free the people, other countries were invaded and people massacred without US interventions. Syria is just a painful example). Certainly not true for Irak (one of the biggest lies in recent history) etc.
In Europe some people say the US political debate is held hostage by people with extremist views (powerful religious groups for example, or the NRA) which doesn't help the candidates to share some common views that could benefit the people, it lacks finesse (nuance). In a nutshell it's polarized with nothing in between.
I still believe politics is an art where compromises must be made and where one must try to understand and agree on some points with the other side. It seems to me it's become impossible and that the most ugly tactics are used against each other, the kind that tarnish the image of politicians and keep bringing common people further away from the politicians.
Andres Aullet 10+
Why? well, the way i see it, is very much like me asking you: "who do you want me to give $10,000 (that oh by the way, includes your generous contributions) ? my sister?, or my grandmother?" In both cases you are completely left out of the equation and have no control whatsoever on what your contribution will be used for.
I know i am exaggerating... but that is my take on the matter. I usually put more in taxes that i get in services... and i've been doing that for decades. I have never seen any real option to affect the way my tax dollars are spent.
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
John Dunbar 10+
Now, lets take a look at Romney. Comes from privilege, still believes in trickle down economics, opposes marriage for gays, wishes to deregulate the financial sector, seems to believe in manifest destiny, supports massive defense spending, etc...
So now we have America pigeonholed by the two party system, which isn't really two parties, its two sects of the same party. This is the same old, same old, conservatives playing demagogue to the religious right and angry upper middle class citizens, who think because they did fine in the free market everyone should and therefore shouldn't have to help anyone who hasn't been as fortunate as them. Democrats play demagogue to the college student progressives and pseudo intellectuals by pretending to stop coroporate corruption and promote civil liberties, yet Obama had more funding from wall street than Mccain did in 2008, while he simultaneously attempts to proliferate powers of the "patriot" act.
So who do I vote for? I wish there was a candidate worthy of a vote, I like Ron Paul but i hate his economic policies as he seems to be an Ayn Rand looney.
The problem here in America is that the candidates are selected by the people, who by the vast majority, get their information from news sources who are controlled by major corporations who, like everyone, have interests they wish to see realized. The entire framework for how politics works in the US needs to be examined, I don't know about other voters, but a lot of my generation is disillusioned.
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
John Dunbar 10+
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/index.php
John Frum 30+
By the way, Ayn Rand hated libertarians.
John Dunbar 10+
John Frum 30+
I don't want to give away personal details for various reasons, but I have stayed in a few countries, some without universal healthcare. I don't suppose that relating my own experiences there would help convince you. In short, I'll say that voluntarism is very common there. I have retired relatives (in one such country) who mobilize drugs that are close to their expiry date to patients who need it immediately. These people are not doctors themselves, but they are in close contact with doctors who volunteer some of their time for the poor. The mobilizers talk to pharmacies and pharmaceutical companies, to get these drugs. These relatives also help out in other (non-medical) ways too. I have also come across hospitals that offer free surgery for the poor. I have friends who have well-paying jobs, but still volunteer at hospitals (as something below nurses). I have also come across doctors who charged very high rates to those who earned well. One of them made it clear why: he was treating poor people for free. So I did not mind paying him double what other doctors charged.
Libertarians aren't against helping the poor. They just think that government is an awful place to do it. Why? Because whether you want to or not, you're forced to pay for it. That's the trouble with regulations: you obey or you get jailed. And because government officials are never close to the problem. They sit in their comfy chairs and make regulations that usually do more harm than good. Unless they are in the pockets of Big Business, of course, which is the situation now in most countries. Libertarians (miniarchists or anarchists) don't want any agency to have this kind of power to ruin their lives.
Ayn Rand did extol selfishness, and it was often weird. But to her credit, she was open to the idea of individuals giving to charity too.
John Frum 30+
My objective here is not to convince you to vote for Ron Paul. I only aim to prevent misunderstandings of libertarian ideas.
Theodore A. Hoppe 200+
Presidents are incorrectly blamed for the failures of government, but presidents have very little executive authority. Who we elect to serve in Congress (and we continue to elect many of the same people) is as important is who we elect for president. We cannot be expecting a president to lead without the consent of the Congress. Yet this is the gridlock WE have created in Washington for decades.
America is a nation of individual states and the rights of the states are many, and in fact, except for the rights that are specifically granted to the federal government by the Constitution, states retain all other rights to govern citizens.
America is also a very divided country; red states and blue states, farming states and large urban cities, populated states and less populated states. One size does not fit all, and the federal government cannot be expected to implement laws and programs that are the answer to everyones problems. State and local government must fill this role. But currently the federal government uses tax revenues as leverage over states to conform to "national standards." This is how the federal government has co opted the right of the states.We must recognized this and start to reverse this trend.
Who will you elect as the governor of your state?
Regarding the election of the president this year, I will give serious consideration to whom the candidates would nominate to the Supreme Court?
R H 20+
Random Chance 30+
Romney, Obama and most of the rest are all Manchurian Candidates.
Most of American citizens are Manchurian Citizens.
Why would I, or you for that matter, vote for a Manchurian Candidate?
pat gilbert 50+
John Frum 30+
Gabo Murcia
Rhona Pavis 50+
pat gilbert 50+
Rhona Pavis 50+
pat gilbert 50+
Dirk Gielen
.. honnest good businesswith best does not depend on slow moving small changes only, such compromises without 'humanitarian' genius experts and visionairs in persue of (perfect) brilliant, engenius, universally inspired righteous, 'humanitarian', theoretic prestigeously esteemed practical masterplan-s, in order to inventually present their very joyful revelation-s what literally reveal political generalizings wisdoms, (I was just lucky crucial essential 'humanitarian' succeses, government prosperity, business prosperity and employment by creative 'detailed' tax reforms(collecting spcificly more) what help and what don't hurth and whom all say OK OK, etc.
I have been developping theory and one of the things I mention is about political responsibilities reflected in applying the lets say standarding working out what must support departments their basic efficient duties.
Not depending on the leader. But made with simple state of the art scientific society functionalities.
Anyways,
('Humanitarian') overall solvers go for overall well being and have the urge to get harm rates down the way they could go down at best, but also mentality issues occurences, issues, implementing fine basics to professions or sectors what they found were missing as specifics to be made by prestigeous creation of covering functional vision(-s) to the diversed society and global reliability wishes as to change those having problems with the nation.
..
D.G.
Dirk Gielen
For instance :
Schools to be renovated/Renovations
Prisons a hell/suggestions to solve the prison problem
Foreign countries hate America or are dangerous/Suggestions how to undone these problems.
Etc.
What should be long extended list to make as many as nice, well at best.
Statistics react with the country's department 's potentials.
Give them time what de potential for the country become 'Possible' ..
A presentation starting by explaining what they have been able theoreticly let make sense.
High Culture opportunities for all involved.
Validated siticens in need for a healthy nutritional absorbation life style -in any case here is being typed after smoothies .. Rich Soups ..variety of meals a diet, etc, to make possible. /Sugesstion: Raise tax on alcohol slightly, preserve it for the cost of buying nutrition, and centralizing or mailing diet.
Answer: Where the many best solutions of solvers are solved, at ease, slow dynamic documentaries on laptop what (with subtitles) what pauzable, ',scriptioning: 'the worktitles-
Result: Global, Own-Continent+The Nation = Who're classes :
Global :
brainstorms:
Nations, 'How by what to do to their leaders what make them so to speak 'the leaders happy family men and women.
Just like their siticens should be able to be happy with their new situations.
Care = What you must eradicate at best (fysical and mental harm)
of - agressive or Angry/Difference
Own Continent :
who're capital,
I am of opinion USA's complexity is about health, wealth, care and development, and do prestigeous business and honnest go
Jayesh Shah
Seriously, conservative ideas of less government and less welfare are good but last time we had a Republican president he did not work that way.
They complain that half the country does not pay tax. I tell you why. They do not make enough money. Increase minimum wage, then they will have taxable income. Republicans do not want to do it.
When Health care reform passed, they complained that the president imposed heavy tax-burden on middle class. Until now they were complaining that the middle class does not pay it's fair share of taxes. They should have been happy with taxation in form of health care reform.
John Smith 30+
John Frum 30+
Ethan Begrowicz
Daryan Sankar
pat gilbert 50+
Kevin Jacobson
edward long 100+
David Hamilton 50+
On government benefits, I understand your perspective, but I disagree, simply because no human being would rather have people on benefits than paying taxes, this, in my opinion, is where the traditional republican perspective goes a bit awry. I think you assume the democrats are evil, when in reality, they are stupid, and they actually believe this nonsense that they can help people... They aren't actually hoping to put more people on these programs, though I agree it seems like that sometimes. Also, to be fair, there's crazy people in both parties, I'm sure some democrats really are that evil.
"Romney will make an effort to convince the world that assaulting American citizens is always going to have a swift, severe reaction. Obama will continue to apologize for whatever we Americans did to upset our aggressors" How can you say that after George Bush was quoted while president, as saying "I'm not really worried about Bin Laden", and Obama killed him... Obama isn't apologizing for anything he doubled down on Afghanistan, and sent people into two new mini wars... building a third.
The idea that he is weak, is greatly exaggerated. I wish he was a turn the other cheek kinda guy. I don't like wars of revenge. Also, Romney has never run a business. A business produces a product, and then sell it to consumers. He has never done that. Just something to think about.
It's a bit embarrassing for me to root for a democrat who put us 5 trillion more dollars in debt though. So it doesn't effect my opinion of you either way.
edward long 100+
David Hamilton 50+
2) Fair point about the service industry, but he wasn't in that either. Mitt Romney is practically a 1980's guy stereo type. He bought failing companies cheap, fired all the employees that the owner had personal relationships with, dropped pensions, and saved the company. It is a way to make money... but it is not building a buisiness. I like private sector pensions and unions, we may disagree on that.
3) Again, they're stupid, not evil. They think that by providing healthy lunches, more children will get off food stamps... They may be wrong, and I may agree with you... but they don't "want more people on food stamps", as is often insisted.
4) No it is not. Bush was the GOP's last candidate, and Romney never criticized him. Fair game.
5) Still have an opinion on the two. I believe in civil liberties, and I know for a fact that if you carefully examine the Romney Ryan plan, you will see quite clearly, they plan to do exactly as much economic damage as Barack will. Therefore, the only difference is civil liberties.
I think the free world is so important, I'm actually supporting a candidate that wants to live in one, rather than the lesser of two evils. I would love others to join me.
edward long 100+
David Hamilton 50+
2) Romney didn't do that. Really look into what Bain Capital does... What they do is say "Hey, you know who would do that job cheaper? A 16 year old Chinese boy... Fire this guy, and move." Anyone could have said that. It doesn't take business sense, it takes sympathy for evil.
3) He see's it as an investment. He believes people are basically good, you and I believe they are evil. He thinks if you give men fish, they will live long enough for you to teach them to fish... and when they are fisherman, they will pay taxes... Again, you can disagree with the strategy, as I do... but the whole "He wants us to fail" thing is nonsense.
4) He supported the most violent, insane, and fiscally irresponsible president in American history... It doesn't make him a clone... It makes him a sheep.
5) The fact that anyone would vote for either of these idiots after the last 4 years, and Johnson wouldn't even be mentioned in a presidential debate. Is exactly why I must be outspoken.
pat gilbert 50+
"For those who toil in the ambit of the federal government, virtue may be its own reward, but Louis Vuitton luggage is not to be sneezed at."
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/washington-359190-political-elementary.html
edward long 100+
David Hamilton 50+
Switching from government employees to contractors, to save money, was a conservative strategy under George Bush, because it worked, unlike almost everything else the man did. Now that Obama is doing the same thing he's "growing government employees", it's double speak.
As you and Pat both know, my generation faces almost a hundred million dollars in unfunded mandates... Neither candidate has any plan to deal with it. They are pathetic idiots, or evil psychopaths, who will make the next 30 years of my life a living hell, one or the other, objectively, take your pick.
David Hamilton 50+
Which is why everyone outside the US see our liberals as moderate conservatives... While our conservatives see them as evil socialists. We actually practiced austerity... but instead... we fight against fantasy world Obama. Washington Post, and Bureau of Labor statistics.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/public-sector-austerity-in-one-graph/2012/06/11/gJQAv89NVV_blog.html
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/06/01/493849/obama-bush-jobs-record/?mobile=nc
Because, a certain generation... which shall remain nameless, refused to increase social security, or medicare contributions, for 50 years, as life expectancy tripled the time the program was expected to pay out... Our economy is still going to collapse, or my generation will be taxed like crazy to pay for social securty, that adults in their 30's in the 80's, the "me" generation... Will soon, feel very entitled to.
pat gilbert 50+
If you have a modicum of understanding of economics the choice is obvious, incidentally it ain't O. There are infinite reasons, not that I'm a fan of Romney but....
Richard Krooman 50+
Imo it is better to give everyone a fair chance and to support those who can for some reason not be able to utilize that fair chance or perhaps goes through several failed attempts before he/she finaly gets it.
On the other side I'd say that people that make the best out of their chance should be rewarded for that (Romney).
However you have to find some equilibrium and at this point in time to get there (in my opinion) the usa should move more towards Obama because usa is already too much like Romney.
David Hamilton 50+
If you were to boil it down between one ore the other though, Obama. I believe in a families right to choose the time of conception. I believe in equal rights under the law for homosexuals. I also believe that Romney wants to invade Iran, and has no interest in promoting peace in the middle east.
Recently Romney suggested, and this is a direct quote "If I were Iran, a crazed fanatic, I'd say let's get a little fissile material to Hezbollah, have them carry it to Chicago, and then if anything goes wrong, or America starts acting up, we'll just say, 'Guess what? Unless you stand down, why, we're going to let off a dirty bomb'. He's practically describing a blueprint for the next lie based build up to an American war the citizens do not want..
Obama, quite simply, despite all the mistakes he has made, and all the horrible policies still in place from George Bush... Is a better human being. He's a better speaker, and he cares not just about his own people, but about all people. Whether he is competent enough to pull it off or not, I believe Barack Obama actually wants as peaceful a reign as he can possibly muster. Even that, may be hopelessly naive, but it's my perception.
Romney has already suggested, that he will lower taxes on the rich, and the cuts he's suggesting are minimal... He plans to raise the national debt, and screw over his children, just like Obama. The difference is, he thinks the reason America is failing, is because rich people here, don't have enough money.
It's a simple choice, if you boil it down to one or the other. It's an embarrassing choice if you analyze it further.
pat gilbert 50+
David Hamilton 50+
pat gilbert 50+
"If you were to boil it down between one ore the other though, Obama. I believe in a families right to choose the time of conception. I believe in equal rights under the law for homosexuals. I also believe that Romney wants to invade Iran, and has no interest in promoting peace in the middle east. "
You would put family rights to choose the time of conception and gay rights above a myriad of problems that threaten the very survival of the U.S. This is an example of the inability to determine what is important.
You believe that is more important to have the apparency of peace in the middle east than to stop a bona fide mad man from having nuclear weapons. Again this the inability to determine what is important.
You place O as a better speaker and that is more important than the substance of the speech. Seriously?
Since you clearly do not understand economics you do not realize that if investment is not encouraged pontificating is moot.
Like I said you do not understand basic economics and worse you do not know that you do not know.
David Hamilton 50+
Provide a shred of evidence for this statement. Give me one example, of a single solution Mitt Romney has put forward, to solve the myriad of problems that threaten the very survival of the US. One of them, is that the international community thinks we're full of war mongering idiots, like Mitt Romney. Have you heard of something called consumer confidence in a world market?
If you think "investment is not encouraged" enough at a 15% tax rate, and the lowest tax revenues in US history, you live in a fantasy world, and have no understanding of the concept of risk. So, no, I'm sorry you've been given some credential at some time in your life which suggests you understand logic or economics... but America survived a 90% income tax on the top bracket of earners... We can survive 15% income tax on investment capital.
Romney already said he would leave Bernanke chairman of the fed by the way, a guarantee of a stimulus under both administrations.
pat gilbert 50+
I don't think investment is not encouraged, it absolutely is not encouraged. You do not understand this and I will not waste my time trying to explain the obvious. Perhaps if you actually had to make a payroll you would understand.
Noveed Hussain
David Hamilton 50+
The reason we are arguing like this Noveed, is that politics are like team sports. Pat has been on team Republican his whole life, I don't like sports that kill people. So, when I talk to him from a perspective outside of team a, or team b... He's used to people saying "The Republicans are evil, and the democrats are awesome"
Thus, defense like "you just don't know economics", or "your guy is even worse". I understand basic economics however, and I'm voting for Gary Johnson, someone who actually believes in limited government and civil liberties, things the Republican party used to stand for.
So talking about how bad Obama is, and how the democrats don't know economics... doesn't work on me... I'm not a Democrat. In the game of politics, you have been able to hurl nothing but insults, for the last 2 decades. You don't even need a platform. So Pat has no idea how to argue with me, because i'm not interested in insulting Mitt Romney, or him. I'm not on a team.
There are objective, easy to look up, verifiable platforms, from both major candidates, which will put America further in debt for the next 4 years... I refuse to accept either platform, and find them both embarrassing. I understand if Pat is insulted by my embarrassment, but I can't help it.
For me, watching Mitt Romney debate Barack Obama, will be like watching two five year olds throw a fit, it's torturous to imagine that either of these men will hold power over my life... I'm a bit eccentric, to say the least... Thank you though, Noveed, and I assure you I'm not as angry as I sound. This stuff is fun to write for me... I feel a bit bad that it probably offends some other people, but I don't censor. I like to write like I'm screaming at the end of a dystopian novel. I apologize for any discomfort I may cause.
edward long 100+