TED Conversations

This conversation is closed.

Who do you think is the right choice for president and why?

The one issue that gets debated on frequently is politics, so what are your thoughts on the 2012 race?
Who won which debates? Who has the best ideas?
are the third party candidates a good option?

Share:
  • thumb
    Nov 7 2012: I voted for Gary Johnson... but still, I'm happy Obama won. I'm against the NDAA, the patriot act, and a bunch of other nonsense that my government is doing... but I don't think the solution is overturning Roe v Wade, and teaching kids "abstinence only" sex ed. I also think gay people will finally get the right to marry in this administration. Good job O... Now, stop killing people with robots.
  • Nov 7 2012: Jill Stein without doubt, http://www.jillstein.org/issues.
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: Politics is all watery gravy and no meat.

    It's time to change the restaurant, not the dish.
  • Nov 3 2012: I remember the Kennedys.. Not camelot, freedom from fear. War was everwhere and our government that we were in imminent threat of devastion at the hands of those godlss commies both outside and inside AMERICA! Kennedy arrived; he was young, handsome, intelligent, didn't mind wearing makeup, But most all he told us that there was some thing wrong with america. But we are a great people and that if it could be done we could do it. The first time I heard Obama speak the thought that flashed through my head was "The Boss is back." Now I am in 2012 I believe that the president will bring honesty and integrity back to the american political process and, more importantly, confidence and pride back to the american people.
  • thumb
    Nov 3 2012: Gary Johnson but since he has no chance Romney

    Because O has to be fired otherwise I recommend investing in firearms and can goods.

    I will say that O may have done the most good for America of any president since Reagan. Why you ask? Glad you asked, O has galvanized the citizens to do what has to be done. Which will be proved out by a landslide victory for Romney.
    • Nov 5 2012: You should vote for Johnson. It would show people what you actually want instead of supporting this idiotic two-party "half the population hates the president, nobody's happy" system we have now.

      If you are insinuating that Obama will take away gun rights, you would be incorrect, Obama has expanded gun rights. But maybe i mistook what you wrote.

      The next thing is just silly.
    • thumb
      Nov 7 2012: It turns out your political predictions, are as pristine, as your understanding of economics... Don't confuse the guns with the cans of soup, or you might accidentally shoot yourself.
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: I missed that one. I had no idea how stupid America has become. But then if you are any indication...

        You probably voted for prop 30 also?
        • thumb
          Nov 7 2012: Are you kidding? I made it out of this generation with a two year degree, and no illegitimate children, or serious drug addictions. I'm not even a fan of alcohol...

          I'm the tip of the iceberg... The average young American is far, far dumber than even I manage. I do enjoy cigarettes despite the suicidal implications though, so... I'm still pretty stupid.

          Don't fret though... I think you're really going to enjoy the GOP 2016 front runner a Shrieking White Hot Sphere, of Pure Rage.

          http://www.theonion.com/video/after-obama-victory-shrieking-whitehot-sphere-of-p,30284/
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: Some of the stuff on the Onion is funny, that is not one of them.

        From what I see you are missing the ability to think critically, to use logic. I think that the schools have consistently been dumbed down. This is not about intelligence it is about the willingness to communicate, which means genuinely get what someone is saying.

        What is the attraction to Obama for you and your friends?
        • thumb
          Nov 7 2012: I voted for Johnson. Obama is simply the lesser of two evils for young people. He's open to gay marriage, promotes stem cell research, gays in the military, equal health insurance rights for women (if you cover Viagra, you have to cover the pill). He also killed the actual terrorist who attacked on 9/11... which George Bush had absoluely no interest in. Most young people believe seal team 6 and the CIA, was all we needed to involve after 9/11 in the first place.

          The long and short of it... The religious right, has turned the Republican party, into a group of backwoods, fear mongering, religious zealots. The positions they have on every major social issue, is not just wrong, it's ancient, perverse, and embarrassing to every sane human being under 30.

          Mitt Romney said that Paul Ryan's completely unfunded tax plan made sense, and Russia was our greatest geopolitical threat... No one under 30 is dumb enough to listen to people who say things like that, even the drug addicts with illegitimate children know better.

          Finally, everything libertarians hate about Obama, NDAA, patriot act, torture... are policies started by George Bush, that Mitt Romney, didn't disagree with.
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: Do you think that the Libertarians will have more influence in the future?

        FWIW I have been a registered libertarian longer than you have been alive.

        I don't have a problem with the social issues. On defense we have to have it period, but at the same time it has to be relevant to today's world.

        But I think what you don't realize, probably because you have not been in the work a day world long enough, is what effects people the most is economic freedom, this is the foundation of the Libertarian party and on that we completely disagree. Even though we are both Libertarians how can that be?
        • thumb
          Nov 7 2012: We don't disagree on economic freedom. I want lower taxes, by making people who ask for our military aid, to print money for it... and people who don't ask for our military aid, to be left alone, unless they present a legitimate military threat.

          I want McDonald's to have grease again, but I don't want it to pretend it's chicken sandwhiches are a "healthy option", or sell their grease to children through the school system. I'm glad you can see what you're doing to your body on the menu, because it's a vice food, a treat... It should have ice cream with sugar, and soy oil should be a joke... but public schools with free lunch, should encourage healthy eating. If they kids whine, let them actually starve for a day, and suddenly broccoli will look great, tell the parents to shut up, or buy food.

          I want us to decide if the Fed is our national bank, and Wal Mart, Starbucks, and McDonald's, are government sponsored corporations getting 0% interest loans... That we all now support, and will make local burger and coffee joints a thing of the past... Or are we capitalists, who think 0% interest loans to corporations that then purchase in enormous scale, is socialism? Personally, I think the digital transfer of giant 0% interest loans to mediocre corporations at best... is immoral, illogical, small business crushing, and economy crushing. I want local joints, with flavor.

          I'm not against swift responses and invading other countries soil to attack and kill legitimate confirmed terrorists. I would not even oppose drone strikes if they had simple weapons that killed confirmed terrrorists, with guns instead of bombs. I'm against civilian deaths. And the "military aged males are all enemy combatants unless proven otherwise" policy, of avoiding pay outs to widows.

          I would not oppose expanding what allows you to get a warrant from a judge for surveillance... Not getting a warrant is unconstitutional, prove your case to one person who doesn't know you.
        • thumb
          Nov 7 2012: Where I depart from most libertarians, and still choose to loosely identify with them... is that we've been paying into social security, and medicare for a long time... and the fed has created money like water for 20 years at least... I think we can raise the age, end the wealth cap, and print some money, taking the hit as international inflation to make the system solvent.

          I think insurance is snake oil... so making it not for profit, and backing it with the secret knowledge that we will print money if we don't pay enough to cover the gap... Might be a worthwhile endeavor, given how popular health and retirement insurance are as snake oil.

          I am against a national health service, but national, not for profit health and retirement insurance make a type of sense to me as a safety net for hard working but gullible, or stupid people. You might convince me that personallizing these programs, and putting everything on the individual, taking interest from people who die without payout... but we don't need profit to sell good snake oil, it sells itself... It protects you from everything.

          Also, I am against the economic freedom to buy people, poison a river, or the air that other people have to breathe or drink, and you don't own. I'm against the economic freedom to pay lower taxes than your maid while we spiral into debt... basic stuff.
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: Of the 3 areas you mention

        Food Labeling

        Defense

        Economy

        Which one do you feel is the most important?
        • thumb
          Nov 7 2012: You should be a commentator on Fox News... You asked about economic freedom, I mentioned three areas of economic freedom I find important. Proper labeling and advertising of products in general, ie fair easy to understand contracts. A more focused, but less bulky and foreign base, or power driven military, and the end to the government sponsorship of corporations.

          As issues of economic freedom that I mentioned, government sponsorship of corporations must end, is number 1. 2 would be reduced military spending, and 3 would be proper labeling and advertising.

          Reframed as which of these 3 areas is most important.

          Defense - the fact that we murder civilians and then refuse to pay their families because they are men, literally keeps me up at night, as it does many aware 18-30 year old men.
          Outside of that I don't think many sane nations really want to engage us, and we can take out insane people as they approach violent action.

          Economy - ending the government sponsorship of corporations.

          3-10 numerous other issues. Then labeling.

          In my dream list 3 would be an international human rights tariff signed on to by the US. Maybe 1% for suffrage, 1% for women's suffrage, 1% for freedom of speech... If the UN decides the patriot act violates freedom of speech... icing on the cake.
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: Labeling

        smaller military

        crony capitalism

        military spending

        war victims rights

        crony capitalism is mentioned a total of 3 times

        labeling is mentioned a total of 2 times

        human rights

        foreign voters rights

        How would you expect to effect the changes you want with out a military?

        It sounds like crony capitalism is your biggest beef?

        You realize that no one wants crony capitalism? But that O is as in bed with the cronies as Bush?
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: Who says I want to be without a military? I'm not against the military, I'm against abuses in the military industrial complex, like over estimating threats to grab contracts.

          My biggest beef is the fact that since I was 19 America has been without a constitution, and and it steals my money to indescriminately murder civilians. Until both of those issues are resolved I really have no use for American society, and refuse to contribute to it in any economically impactful way.

          Crony capitalism is a big beef as well, but I could learn to tolerate Wal Mart, they should just rename it "Conglomerate State General Store 1". Yes both parties are full of evil psychopaths who wish to implement crony capitalism, steal our money to murder people, and imprison us without trial. That's why I couldn't vote for Obama.

          I'm glad he won, because in a world where no one is sane, or decent... We might as well have sex ed, do stem cell research, and treat gay people fair. What did Mitt Romney have to offer you, or anyone else?
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2012: I don't know what you mean regarding having no Constitution, specifically what do you mean?

        Apparently you are going Galt?

        I'm not sure how much Walmart is a crony certainly not in the league of the big 5 banks.

        Mainly what Romney offered was a solution to this:

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=EW5IdwltaAc

        Which imo dwarfs anything else
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

          The Patriot Act, and its expansion through the NDAA directly took this right away.

          "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;"

          Again... number 5... Poof! Gone.

          "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial"

          Number 6 Hasta la bye bye.

          "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

          8... Not so great any more...

          Given, that under The Patriot Act, and NDAA, United States citizens can be tapped, convicted without trial by the person who unconstitutionally tapped them, tortured and never released... The United States government now can take away your freedom of speech, and right to bear arms, without trial... Thus, the entire bill of rights was rendered completely useless by the patriot act, and its expansion in the NDAA. Bradley Manning has yet to see a trial for his wikileak.

          I've actually had issues with paying taxes ever since the war started... I get to 15 or 20 k, and I literally start thinking, "Alright, this is it, across this threshold, you pay taxes and murder civilians." Usually I quit my job or in my younger days fell into some self destructive habit. Only read Rand two, maybe three years ago, but identified very closely with Galt.

          Going Galt would require a bit of savings, right now i'm just surfing the poverty line, hoping we'll stop this nonsense and I can build some green tech.
        • thumb
          Nov 9 2012: He offered a solution to that problem... He just wouldn't tell you what it was, until after you elected him : p

          Also, the truth is, he offered your generation a solution... It was basically an elderly bail out "everyone 55 and up gets their benefits, unchanged, young people get privatization"... People 55 and up are in the generation we can't afford to have retire... They paid into a program designed for people with a life expectancy of 59 their whole life.
      • thumb
        Nov 9 2012: Of course the bill of rights should continue no argument. But in context when that was started we had just suffered though 9/11.

        The solution is regarding the video that you didn't bother to look at. Ryan had a plan regarding this. The other solution is that despite your disbelief in smaller government it really does create jobs. There have only been 2 times when government was made less onerous and both times it created a boom time. Which reliefs the greatest enslavement of all which is the financial enslavement you talk about.

        But it is all rearranging the deck chairs on Titanic unless we get the debt handled.

        Anyway you appear to be happy to blame rather than put out any effort so I'm done with this conversation.
        • thumb
          Nov 10 2012: I watched the video. It describes absolutely no difference between Mitt Romney, and Barack Obama. The math of the Paul Ryan budget makes sense only in a fantasy world.

          I don't blame anyone for anything. I hold individuals responsible for their choices and actions.
  • Nov 2 2012: Rocky Anderson or maybe Jill Stein I could vote for, Obama and Romney are representative of 2 slightly differing factions of the business party meant to create an illusion of opposing ideologies, these ideologies both support the current power structure.. Why is it that Romney has not criticized Obama for not closing Guantanamo? Why is it that Romney has not criticized Obamas war against whistleblowers as well as his expansion of the Patriot Act and NDAA etc...Why is it Romney has not criticized Obama for not prosecuting those who were responsible for the economic collapse? I could go on but I think it would be an exercise in futility. The answer is that they both support nanny state capitalism, they both support a foreign policy of murder and imperialism, they are both bought and paid for by the financial institutions, and they both play sycophant to the military industrial complex.

    Both candidates have high paid well sought after public relations handlers who train them what to say based on very trusted polling tools. They are meant to be symbols of the manufactured narrative of the republican and the democrat. If they actually listened to public opinion I wouldn't mind it, but how often have we elected presidents who kiss babies and make promises only to go on and continue the same destructive path we have been on?
  • Nov 2 2012: The point I'm making is that he's only had four years, and that is not enough time for anyone to recover from the Bush Administration
    • thumb
      Nov 2 2012: I agree Ryan,
      The MESS Obama stepped into could never be totally changed in one term, ESPECIALLY with the political agendas of many of our representatives. Obama presented something different from the Bush administration, which is why he was elected, and he is working toward that goal....hopefully for another term:>)
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: A direct quotation taken in context cannot be considered twisting someone's words. Not guilty.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: Taken in context....those are the operative words...you apparently forgot to use the rest of Ryan's statement.
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: Here is the full text: "Obama has made a very small dent inside American society, don't forget he was handed a terrible economy by Bush," I see a campaign slogan in those exact words, don't you? Vote for Obama because "He has made a very small dent!" .Or, how about another exact in-context quote: "The correct answer is that Obama is the best choice for president because even though he hasn't done much for this country,. . . ". Surely you see the powerful campaign slogan in that exact, in-context quote? "Vote for Obama even though he hasn't done much for this country!" And who could pass this one by? "Obama is more truthful than Romney though, not saying Obama never lies,. . . : " I'm not saying he never lies, but vote for Obama." All verbatim, in-context quotations. No twisting of words. Not guilty.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: Edward,
          You have made your choice clear. How about being respectful of other people's choices?
        • Nov 2 2012: but you misunderstood the context of my statements, as no one one who is a citizen of the USA could possibly have accomplished a total recovery from the Economy plunging in the Bush Administration, I know I'm reiterating a lot but the fact that you see my statements as campaign slogans for the GOP campaign calls for it!
      • Nov 2 2012: @Coleen thank you
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: You are welcome Ryan,
          I notice from your profile that you are relatively new on TED, and perhaps a young student? I was not going to participate in this discussion, until it appeared that you were being bullied.

          Welcome to TED, and I sincerely hope you continue to participate:>)
      • Nov 2 2012: I am new to TED and I am a freshman in college, I started watching talks here for my courses in college classes and see it as a great tool. I have only been bullied in Middle School but have never been since. I plan to continue participating on TED as much as possible, as I get great information from here.
    • thumb
      Nov 2 2012: Wow! The great slogans just keep coming! " Vote for Obama in '08 and '12 because he won't be able to lead us to recovery with just one term."
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: Edward,
        You have made your choice clear. How about being respectful of other people's choices?
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: Am I free to go? Have the charges of twisting words you accused me of been dropped? Please practice you moderator skills on someone else. TED folks will bust my chops if necessary. Thank you!
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: Edward,
        It is not a secret that when people do not agree with you, you get testy. I am simply another TED participant respectfully asking you to be respectful of other people's choices and comments.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: You are not the judge of disrespect. TED Moderators are. I am engaging in on-topic conversation of a somewhat highly-charged tenor. At no time have I been disrepectful. If your remark about bullying is directed at some particular individual(s) you should flag those as inappropriate and let the TED folks determine the appropriateness of such a serious accusation. Please don't assess my personality traits. Thus far you have accused me of twisting another's words to suit my argument; of being testy; of being disrepectful; and , most grievously, I suspect you are accusing me of bullying. I would like you to stop accusing me. For the record I wish to be excluded from off-topic sessions not directly contributing to posted questions, ideas, or debates. If you have a problem with my conduct please take it up with TED Administrators. Thank You.
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: You are "right" Edward....I am not the judge of anything. You do, however, twist comments to try to make them "fit" your perspective.....I can vouch for that! I totally agree....off topic is not good.
        BTW...your last couple comments to Ryan were much more appealing and respectful:>)
      • Nov 5 2012: Romney said he'd turn the economy around in 8 to 10 years. What's wrong with Obama saying he'd do it in 8 to 10 years.
        • thumb
          Nov 5 2012: Citation please.
        • thumb
          Nov 5 2012: I think that's perfectly fine Ryan. I thought Romney said he is going to turn the economy around immediately..........oh...........I forgot..........he contradicts himself regularly!
      • Nov 6 2012: Sorry, I can't reply any further on the other thread of comments. You asked for a citation of Romney saying he would balance the budget in 8 to 10 years.

        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48959273/ns/meet_the_press-transcripts/t/september-mitt-romney-ann-romney-julian-castro-peggy-noonan-ej-dionne-bill-bennett-chuck-todd/#.UJhamG9E6nc

        "I'll balance the budget by the end of my second term. Doing it in the first term would cause, I believe, a-- a dramatic impact on the economy. Too-- too dramatic. And therefore the steps I've put in place and we've put together a plan that lays out how we get to a balanced budget within eight to 10 years."
        • thumb
          Nov 6 2012: Thank you for the link. I trust it was an honest mistake on your part to not recognize the HUGE difference between "turning the economy around" and balancing the budget. They are related actions, but of vastly different magnitude. Paying down $16 trillion in debt (53% more than when Obama took office) is a momumental task. Turning the economy around can be acheived in much less time than needed to balance the budget. Romney knows how to do it from experience.
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: The right choice would be the candidate who get's the majority of the peoples votes. If this would also be the 'best' choice is nothing but a matter of perspective, favour and the quality of information considered by each voter and the final actions performed by the one who finally takes office.

    Good luck!
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: Obama is a failed president who has repeatedly demonstrated The Peter Principle in action. Romney is by profession devoted to the actual task of large scale managing and governing. Romney has consistently instituted policies which rescue people and businesses from financial ruin, rather than pushing them closer to the precipice as Obama has. On Nov. 6 we have the luxury of deciding between two proven individuals. One is a proven failure. The other a proven success. We do not have to go with our intuition, or toss a coin. Two known quantities are on the ballot: one a proven, ethical, trustworthy winner- Mitt Romney; the other a duplicitious failure offering four more years of circling the drain- Barak Hussein Obama.
    • Nov 2 2012: I don't think we were watching the same debates lol
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: You are correct Mr. Johnson. I did not watch the debates. I read the complete transcripts afterwards and found them contaminated by media bias and incompetence. I find performance reviews much more valuable as assessment tools. I assume your point is that my assessment of our two choices is inaccurate. Noted. I think the post is very crisp and concise, don't you? I read, "Who do YOU (my emphasis) think the right choice for president is?" I find it interesting that, thus far, only one response has simply answered the question. Have you a simple, direct answer? Thank you!
        • Nov 2 2012: I do have a simple direct answer. The correct answer is that Obama is the best choice for president because even though he hasn't done much for this country, Romney will send us in a downward spiral due to his medicare policies (pamphlets) and his ability to care only for the wealthy and those without disabilities. Obama cares for all the classes of Americans, not just the upper class. Romney, I'm sorry to say, has no ability to hold to his own opinions. If the leader of our country can't hold to his own opinions what would that say about our country? Our enemies would see us as weak.
          If you want to make an educated decision in 2016 I suggest you actually watch the debates instead of reading the transcript. It makes all the difference.
          The one thing I'm sure we all saw was Romney arguing with the moderator. If he tries to talk over the moderators instead of knowing his place how will he lead a country, talk to congress, or lead a meeting of the UN. All of these need communication skills and the ability to see others opinions and think them over, instead of seeing them as wrong right from the get - go.
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: That 15 line, 2 paragraph, off-topic excursion is your idea of a simple, direct answer? I'm glad I didn't ask you to elucidate! I agree with your benevolent assessment of the current administration: ". . . he hasn't done much for the country". Great campaign slogan! I hope you don't mind if I use it as an example of how people rationalize supporting Barak Hussein Obama.
        • Nov 2 2012: It is simple, if you watched the debates and aid any attention to the 2012 race in order to make an educated decision. you asked for a simple and direct answer. I gave you something I saw as simple and direct. Basically it all comes down to the fact that Romney is a lying cheating scandal of a candidate who changes his mind like he changes his underwear and is not qualified for even a VP position. and explain to me how my last reply was off topic because I think I hit all topics possible that were seen, or in your case read, in all debates.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: Gee Ryan, you need to get over being shy and not expressing you opinion. Don't hold back .. tell us what you think.

          On second thought ... I know what you think ... I would be interested in what you know ... not just opinions.

          I happen to agree with using performance history and not hot air of hopes and promises.

          Thank You.
  • Nov 10 2012: Obama had the chance for honesty and integrity when he was asked about
    investigating the Bush gang. He refused. That was all I needed to know about him.

    Ralph Nader lived in one small room for 25 years while he worked in complete dedication for the American people to bring about changes, make their lives safer and many other things. He passed up being bought off to working for u.s. all.

    If he was in a group of candidates, he would be the only one who could honestly and accurately say he knew how to get things done, and he could also say what he had done and everyone would know it is the truth, because they do, they know what he has done for the last 40 years of his life.

    But vote for him? No. Let him be marginalized by the bought and controlled media, scoffed at and made a mockery of while those who haven't done a thing except garner millions and millions of fraudulent wealth or at the least, very suspicious wealth, wind up being the only ones we can vote for because no one is willing to stand up for what they know and cast a vote for a third candidate or simply write them in, like a Ron Paul.

    Neither Obama or Romney is right or a good choice. The last time someone tried to come from nowhere and run for President, their career was ruined for about 25 or 30 years. That was Jerry Brown. Obama came from nowhere so you know he was put in, he wasn't really voted in no matter what lies you prefer to believe.

    What is the most pressing problem America faces? it isn't the economy. It is freedom, your liberties and the ongoing assassination of the Constitution. It is the one thing all people fight for. I'll bet you think it's health care or the economy or something else that is as trivial as the trinkets first used to distract, fool and purchase the island bank of Manhattan.

    Health care is a trinket. The economy is another trinket. Freedom is like gold and they have you off the gold standard, meaning off the Freedom Standard. You're on a paper or plastic flight.
  • Nov 4 2012: I agree!! I'm only 18 but I prefer Obama's mindset
  • Nov 3 2012: I would've voted for Ron Paul too if he hadn't dropped out
  • thumb
    Nov 3 2012: I don't think Bronco Bama or Myth Romney are all too different. I would support Ron Paul, even though i still disagree with him in many areas
  • Nov 2 2012: no problem ;) I'm just a young citizen with an old soul hoping the best for his country.
  • Nov 2 2012: The problem is sometimes the people who tell them what to say... Tell them to say the wrong thing! No matter what the party!
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: @Ryan Johnson RE link to Huffington Post article.
    Thank you. I will read it. Also thank you for sharing some personal details which lend a certain reality to all this huffing and puffing. God bless you young man. and God Help America.
  • Nov 2 2012: Ken Brown said: "i think there is the open source movement on the horizon as well as the Slow movement to counteract the instant answer system prevalent in this online centric world. In the next ten years we might be faced with a entirely new system that might leave us old types off to the left."
    I believe what he means is that "there is change going on because of Obama, it is just slow because of the challenges he as Pres faces"
    and that when he says "... a entirely new system that might leave us old types off to the left." That he is saying the government will push the elderly aside, taking them out of the equation, not caring for that part of the population anymore. That's just my take on it.
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: @ Ken Brown RE: " I don't think anyone could turn it around in 4 years. . . "
    I am sorry Mr. Brown I do not get your point. Please clarify. Thank you!
    • Nov 2 2012: I think what he means is that as the systems are constantly changing, it will push some minorities, ie: elderly, disabled, etc) off to the wayside
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: As an old geezer I do not like the sound of that! What is the substance thereof?
    • thumb
      Nov 3 2012: What i mean is the government is reacting to the speed of direct online participation and has tried to implement a system that will cater to it, you may baulk at it as it is new but new has proven to push aside the old and change things very fast. Look at how Kodak fell and yet it developed the first small digital camera. All of you Americans want change and you want it now, if you truly want direct participation then you will want open source otherwise you will be left behind with what you have now. This is how i view my political self, 65% conservative, 25% liberal, 15% Earth system. There's a talk on Ted that addresses this, i just can't remember what was the name of it. No one who took the hot seat of your country could have given a financial recovery within 4 years, it's a three term problem unless you want to have starving invalids and the poor resorting to violence just to buy enough to eat and the rest of you living in compounds set up by private companies playing on your fear. I don't really care who wins, it's not my election but there is change coming to your system, if you can't see it, it is because you are inside the bubble.

      I'm surprised no one here has heard of the Slow movement, it started in Italy with food and is slowly making it's way felt through other media, it's about quality and the fact that you are not designed to run on Av gas 24hrs a day. Technologists really hate it. EDIT I listened to one speaker talk of it as a reaction to our short lives, our mortality, so we are trying to experience every moment available before our dream ending.

      Take a look at this amazing speech from an area of western perception that classifies it as third world but in reality is far beyond where the west is now. The thing is is that South America can go it alone, it doesn't need the planet, it has everything it needs to become an emergent power house.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Mr465Atwenw
      • thumb
        Nov 3 2012: Thank you Mr.Brown.
        "The first element of the environment is human happiness." So says Equador's President who obviously agrees with our (the USA) Declaration of Independence which defines the three inalienable rights a free nation must afford its citizens: Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of HAPPINESS (my emphasis). We may be hard put to call this on-topic, but what a meaningful debate it would be to argue the question: Is market-driven, hyper-consumerism inconsistent with human happiness?" If the answer is yes our President would be obligated to set a new course for the USA. Yipes!
        • thumb
          Nov 3 2012: It's your country Ed.

          I think those in power will have to update their mindsets from 5 years in the past to now and learn to use the coming technology of open source government, you will have more of a say than what you think you have now whether it is good or bad.

          The beast will rise regardless, it's rider awaits.
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: none of them ın my opinion you should ask this question what changes? OBAMA was indicated as a hero but we see realities there is not change ... only actors changing problem is very deep ... people are unconscious it is sure sign of corruption firstly american society should be recognize around them ...life is not only breathing
    • Nov 2 2012: Obama has made a very small dent inside American society, don't forget he was handed a terrible economy by Bush
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: Four years at the helm of the Executive branch of the country and no visible improvement? In fact, there is continuing deterioration. Obama has more power than any person on Earth and he has done what with it?. . ."not much" except socialized medicine, which will probably not survive, and failed stimulus programs. At what point do we stop blaming the previous administration and pull the country out of the supposed "dive" it was in when he took over? If it takes four years for him to accomplish "not much", what will he do for the next four years. . . completely reverse his own failed policies? Vote for Romney!
        • Nov 2 2012: I refuse to vote for Romney due to his lack of thought given to medicare dependents and disabled citizens, as I am one myself.
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: "He has made a very small dent. . . " You are a treasure trove of campaign slogans for Obama. This one is almost as good as " He hasn't done much for the country." Keep them coming Mr. Johnson you are winning people over in droves.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: You seem to be twisting another person's statements to try to support your argument again Edward.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: I don't think anyone could turn it around in 4 years but i think there is the open source movement on the horizon as well as the Slow movement to counteract the instant answer system prevalent in this online centric world. In the next ten years we might be faced with a entirely new system that might leave us old types off to the left.
      • thumb
        Nov 2 2012: I do not know what Romney has said about Medicare and the disabled. If you will share that information upon which you are making your decision I will be grateful. Perhaps you can provide a link, and please, I beg you, don't tell me I should have watched the debates. Seriously, no heated argument intended, upon what cited basis are you doing all this name calling? Be specific please. Let's cool-off and act grown up.
        • thumb
          Nov 2 2012: Yes...excellent idea!
        • Nov 2 2012: Here:
          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2012/10/02/romney-health-care-plan_n_1931711.html
          It states that Romney would have higher deductibles in medical insurance plans. People like me who have many health issues cannot afford high deductibles. The deductible I have now is high enough as it is. Luckily under Obamacare I am covered under my parent's BCBS insurance until I am 26 being disabled and unemployed, Obamacare is a Godsend and I would be a fool to vote for Romney, Also if you're up for a bit of light reading read this: http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml It is a set of laws set forth by the UN which are to be followed otherwise punishable by international law. I'm sure Romney breaks a few. Especially Art. 19 when it comes to Abortion. breaking Art. 19 also breaks Art. 30
  • Nov 2 2012: They who believe this still, are fools still.
  • thumb
    Nov 2 2012: We always get the government we deserve. The two leading candidates are not best choices but one of them will win. Rather than third parties, I would prefer NO parties. Representatives should represent US, not their well-monied cronies and their own money interests.

    Neither candidate is honest and neither candidate is willing to talk about fixing what is so horribly broken. The way to fix it will cost anyone who talks about it his/her job.
    • Nov 2 2012: Obama is more truthful than Romney though, not saying Obama never lies, but Romney is the one who lies the most