U.S. Presidential Election page 19 (locked)

1843 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by ColtArmy:

If president Obama is elected for a second term, just think of the mess he will inherit this time.

Thankfully not as bad as the mess he inherited last time. We’re actually more or less stabilised, as opposed to companies toppling left, right and center.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by ColtArmy:

If president Obama is elected for a second term, just think of the mess he will inherit this time.

I don’t know if “inherit” is the best word to use,,,esp. when his second term is nothing more than a continuation of his current programs//agenda.

A huge mess, aka near serious depression, takes time to recover from…esp. when the “opposition” is doing everything possible (short of overt rebellion) to thwart much of any realistic programs for reasonable recovery.

What I’m looking for,,as being much as important,,is a return to a Dem. majority in the House and a much more solid one in the Senate. THEN, we just might see some real results towards establishing a more rational, FAIR distribution of wealth produced.

The middle & lower classes can take only so much burden before their “backs are broken”….maybe for good.

 
Flag Post

I cannot take Obama supporters seriously anymore. I keep listing facts, they deflect and continue to insult and blame.
Unemployment under Obama:
above 8% for 43 weeks in a row
9% on average, 15% real unemployment
$5.3 trillion added to make $16 trillion in the national debt in total (Will likely exceed $20 trillion if Obama is reelected)
1 in 6 Americans in poverty
46 million people on food stamps (23 million added under Obama)
Median income level of middle class families has fallen by $4,000
Middle East Policy is falling apart
Obamacare is now Obamatax being levied on the middle class which is also leading to increasing health premiums
Solyndra and other green energy business subsidies have failed and cost $527 million dollars from tax payers
Housing market has depreciated
47% pay no federal income taxes and expect the middle class to support them.
http://eliserichmond.com/obamas-failures/

To those Obama supporters out there, thanks for ruining America. When the impending fiscal calamity is upon us, the onus will be on you for electing failure to another term. Maybe you need to suffer a bit otherwise you’ll keep making terrible decisions.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darear:

Maybe you need to suffer a bit otherwise you’ll keep making terrible decisions.

Is that supposed to be some sort of threat to the health and welfare of liberals in general, Darear? If you are planning on doing something really silly offline, I would definitely advise against it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:
Originally posted by Darear:

Maybe you need to suffer a bit otherwise you’ll keep making terrible decisions.

Is that supposed to be some sort of threat to the health and welfare of liberals in general, Darear? If you are planning on doing something really silly offline, I would definitely advise against it.

Hahaha that cracked me up! I mean suffer as in suffer under Obama’s economy. We’re approaching the fiscal cliff and CBO estimates we’re headed into another recession next year.

 
Flag Post

Yea, we’ll get a double dip, there’s no doubt about that. However, I trust Obama’s driving more than I trusted Bush’s. McCain was the wrong choice at the time. Even now, I’m happier with a candidate who has stuck to his guns all the way through (Obama) than I am with someone who flip-flops every time the wind turns (Romney). It’s not even about ideology at this point. It is simply about a steady hand at the tiller being better than a dithering hand.

If we’re going full bore over the abyss anyway, I would rather go with someone who picks a course and sticks to it – rightly or wrongly, over someone who changes his course every few days, without a real clue which group he should be pandering to this week.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by ColtArmy:

If president Obama is elected for a second term, just think of the mess he will inherit this time.

I like this alot.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

Yea, we’ll get a double dip, there’s no doubt about that. However, I trust Obama’s driving more than I trusted Bush’s. McCain was the wrong choice at the time. Even now, I’m happier with a candidate who has stuck to his guns all the way through (Obama) than I am with someone who flip-flops every time the wind turns (Romney). It’s not even about ideology at this point. It is simply about a steady hand at the tiller being better than a dithering hand.

If we’re going full bore over the abyss anyway, I would rather go with someone who picks a course and sticks to it – rightly or wrongly, over someone who changes his course every few days, without a real clue which group he should be pandering to this week.

Let’s play trivia.
Obama flip flopped on what issue:
A) Gay marriage
B) The Wars
C) Closing Guantanamo Bay
D) All of the above

D, you guessed it!
Very hypocritical that people brand Romney as a flip flopper while not accounting for Obama’s reversals on issues.

So basically you’re not voting on ideology? You’re voting on who better can handle the economy? So does it make sense to choose a community organizer and civil rights lawyer who had absolutely no experience running a business or having a REAL job over a business CEO who was astonishingly successful in creating jobs?

Funny how you mention Romney pandering. Obama has pandered to Latinos, you cannot tell me Obama reversed his immigration policy to allow amnesty to those under 30 just out of the goodness of his heart… So much BS here.

Notice how my other statement was full of facts. Care to dispute them?

 
Flag Post

Dareer, you so silly.

From the start Obama was fairly pro-gay rights (changing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell to let openly gay people join the military was one thing he said he’d do during his first campaign) although for political reasons he didn’t delve too much into the gay marriage issue.

He never said he’d end the International War on Terror. He said he’d withdraw our troops from Iraq. Guess what, we did. Note that we’ve (for the most part) left Iraq to its own devices, having rebuilt much of what we destroyed and trained many of the Iraqi military close to our standards.

He told us that he’d close the prisons in Guantanamo Bay, and that’s one of the first moves he did when he got into office. There’s more to that place than a prison, mind you.

Running a business and running a country are two different things. Besides, the market crashed before Obama even got into office. We’ve had reasonable economic growth for the past 29 months. What, you thought that the problem would get fixed overnight?

 
Flag Post
He told us that he’d close the prisons in Guantanamo Bay, and that’s one of the first moves he did when he got into office. There’s more to that place than a prison, mind you.

Stop playing semantics. You know darn well what he meant to do and he didn’t.

Running a business and running a country are two different things. Besides, the market crashed before Obama even got into office. We’ve had reasonable economic growth for the past 29 months. What, you thought that the problem would get fixed overnight?

In what world is the slowest economic growth out a recession since the Depression “reasonable economic growth?” In what world is GDP growth at <2% (in other words, stagnant), a decrease from the past quarter’s growth, reasonable? As for getting this fixed over night…

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

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

Dareer, you so silly.

From the start Obama was fairly pro-gay rights (changing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell to let openly gay people join the military was one thing he said he’d do during his first campaign) although for political reasons he didn’t delve too much into the gay marriage issue.

He never said he’d end the International War on Terror. He said he’d withdraw our troops from Iraq. Guess what, we did. Note that we’ve (for the most part) left Iraq to its own devices, having rebuilt much of what we destroyed and trained many of the Iraqi military close to our standards.

He told us that he’d close the prisons in Guantanamo Bay, and that’s one of the first moves he did when he got into office. There’s more to that place than a prison, mind you.

Running a business and running a country are two different things. Besides, the market crashed before Obama even got into office. We’ve had reasonable economic growth for the past 29 months. What, you thought that the problem would get fixed overnight?

onlinediot, you are silly.

So Obama, according to this timeline, flip flopped in the issue of gay marriage. A flip flop is a flip flop even if Obama did it for political reasons which makes it worst in some aspects.

2008 (August) – “OPPOSES MARRIAGE: In an interview with Rick Warren at the Saddleback Church, Obama defined marriage by saying, “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian…it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.” Even though Obama still supported civil unions at this point, his statements drew a bold line between opposite-sex couples and same-sex couples.”

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2011/06/22/250931/timeline-barack-obama-marriage-equality/?mobile=nc

This is from the ultra liberal site think progress…

Obama did not close Guantanamo Bay. You are wrong on that.

Reasonable economic growth? Why are all the leading economic indicators going in the negative direction then? Why is there still a net loss of over a half million of jobs. Why is unemployment still 8%?

 
Flag Post

How was I playing semantics? You’re half right though, I know what he meant to do, and he did do it, quit being mad.

Shit dude, we’re in a deep hole. We don’t have some WW2 style production boost that we did in the Great Depression, either. As I’m sure you understand, the issue came from people over borrowing. Well, of course now that everybody hates their credit cards, there isn’t much confidence in becoming an entrepreneur and having to take a 100k++ loan to start your own business. That means there’s little desire for anyone to create jobs.

In your video, I think Obama was trying to say that he wouldn’t expect much in the way of support if the economy wasn’t recovering. Economic growth/recovery is a process, not a goal. The GDP growth being low would only be something you could argue if inflation was much higher and unemployment wasn’t reducing.

As of August, unemployment is down to 8.1%, but about 7.4% if you don’t count teenagers (I don’t usually, considering that’s when they’re students). Also, inflation is down to 1.7% so having GDP growth at anything higher than that is economic growth.

 
Flag Post

onlineidiot has refuted your points quite nicely , Darear. I remember back in Obama’s original campaign, doing right by the LGBT community was big on the agenda.

Darear:

So basically you’re not voting on ideology?

If I was voting on ideology, I would pick Obama. He has done much for the transhumanist movement, and looks set to do much more.

Obama has pandered to Latinos

If your biggest issue with him is his lack of racism, I don’t believe we have anything further to discuss.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

onlineidiot has refuted your points quite nicely , Darear. I remember back in Obama’s original campaign, doing right by the LGBT community was big on the agenda.

Darear:

So basically you’re not voting on ideology?

If I was voting on ideology, I would pick Obama. He has done much for the transhumanist movement, and looks set to do much more.

Obama has pandered to Latinos

If your biggest issue with him is his lack of racism, I don’t believe we have anything further to discuss.

I’m sorry but is this a joke?
He refuted my points quite nicely? By how, lying about Gitmo and Obama’s stance on gay marriage. He hasn’t refuted anything. Plus you never addressed the facts I put out there on the failed Obama economy.

I fail to see why you Obama supporters regard Obama as an infallible Messiah. Especially when he’s committed war crimes by unauthorized military actions and drone strikes.

Typical liberal! Everything either has to do with racism or lack there of. Obama is clearly pandering to Latinos to get their vote. He deported more illegals than Bush and now reversed his immigration policy via executive fiat and now is letting more illegal immigrants come more than ever. What’s racist is pandering to one select racial group instead of helping Americans as a whole. Again it’s not about being racist or not it’s about pandering to one racial group just to win an election then damning the whole entire country to pay for this mess. Illegal immigration and this welfare society is going to be the death knell of America.

I don’t believe you should discuss this any further…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darear:

I fail to see why you Obama supporters regard Obama as an infallible Messiah.

That’s probably because nobody but a handful of right-wingers see him as anybody’s messiah.

Especially when he’s committed war crimes by unauthorized military actions and drone strikes.

Meh, every president commits war crimes. It’s the in fad. The last one committed plenty as well. Germany even called for him to face trial.

What’s racist is pandering to one select racial group instead of helping Americans as a whole.

Immigration isn’t about helping Latinos. It’s about helping immigrants to contribute to the country. A fair number of them are latino, but not all by any means. That you have to focus on and single out one particular race, is an example of a deep racist bias in your own thinking.

He’s offered several paths for illegal immigrants who offer real constructive service to the country, to become legal. If they’re that keen on helping us, they should certainly get the benefits. He has also deported more people than any other president in U.S. history at least on a month by month basis. Nearly double that of anyone else. That is hardly the act of someone utterly pro illegal immigrants.

We both know a good welfare safety net is crucial to keeping disease and crime down among those who have no other way to live, whether forced there by temporary job loss, or permanent disability. It is a boon to the country to have it. there are a handful of problem individuals yes, but those individuals crimes are their own. The system is not broken because of them, any more than the concept of shops is broken because people can steal from them.

We need to find and punish the lazy bastards, but not punish those who are on welfare through no fault of their own.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darear:

I’m sorry but is this a joke?

Well considering the ret of your post, I’m really having trouble figuring out whether or not you’re trolling by this point.

He refuted my points quite nicely? By how, lying about Gitmo and Obama’s stance on gay marriage.

And I’m assuming that you have a reliable that gave you this information?

I fail to see why you Obama supporters regard Obama as an infallible Messiah. Especially when he’s committed war crimes by unauthorized military actions and drone strikes.

Source pl0x?

Typical liberal! Everything either has to do with racism or lack there of.

Except that’s so hyperbolized that I can’t help but think that you’re doing on purpose just to spite her.

Obama is clearly pandering to Latinos to get their vote.

Because no president has ever tried to get votes before?

Again it’s not about being racist or not it’s about pandering to one racial group just to win an election then damning the whole entire country to pay for this mess.

Well caucasians are a race too, so…

 
Flag Post

Ignoring tenco1/karmakoolkid as always.

viktaTae are you actually insinuating I’m racist for mentioning that Obama is pandering to Latinos for votes? Really, liberals base their whole world view in two spheres one sphere believes they are right and that mentioning any problems in immigration is wrong the other has it that anyone who doesn’t agree with liberals must be a racist. I am tired of arguing with this utter BS. Continue the argument on your own. I’ve made a case already. If you would go to my forum posts I list out every single one of Obama’s failures, I’m sure I’ve left plenty out, but I got the major ones in there. Unsurprisingly, no one wants to talk about Obama’s economic or foreign policy record…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darear:

Ignoring tenco1/karmakoolkid as always.

So wait, did karma make an invisible post, now?

viktaTae are you actually insinuating I’m racist for mentioning that Obama is pandering to Latinos for votes?

No, just that it’skinda racist to think that all immigrants are latino. (Which you kinda implied.)

Really, liberals base their whole world view in two spheres one sphere believes they are right and that mentioning any problems in immigration is wrong the other has it that anyone who doesn’t agree with liberals must be a racist.

And the right doesn’t have that?

Also, you’re forgetting that there are plenty more spheres that you could pick on.

I am tired of arguing with this utter BS. Continue the argument on your own.

Arguments don’t work that way…

Unsurprisingly, no one wants to talk about Obama’s economic or foreign policy record…

Wait, isn’t vika kind already doing that?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by tenco1:

So wait, did karma make an invisible post, now?

Darear believes you are Karma. I’m tracking the number of high-post accounts that are apparently all Karma as four now.

Yourself, Karma, 1132, and JaumeBG. That you all have different opinions and writing styles is irrelevant. That you somehow sometimes manage to post simultaneously on different threads is irrelevant, and that if you were all Karma, Karma would be awake 24/7 to deal with the online time overlap is all utterly irrelevant, somehow.

No, just that it’skinda racist to think that all immigrants are latino. (Which you kinda implied.)

I pointed that out above, and in response Darear went off about Latinos again. Post directly above yours.

(Darear’s post)

Really, liberals base their whole world view in two spheres one sphere believes they are right and that mentioning any problems in immigration is wrong the other has it that anyone who doesn’t agree with liberals must be a racist.

If you ignore my entire counterargument with sources above, that tears this claim into absolute tatters, then yes, I guess it must be so.

(Darear’s post)

Unsurprisingly, no one wants to talk about Obama’s economic or foreign policy record…

(Tenco’s post)

Wait, isn’t vika kind already doing that?

So was onlineidiot, in rather more detail than I covered. But for whatever reason, his posts (also sourced) were not acceptable to the argument, nor worthy of a reply.

 
Flag Post

Guys, something came up that may cause a small amount of trouble to the Romney campaign: the white house has made an ios app. this will most likely allow them to send information to today’s wired people, wherever they may be. now, everyone has the ability to see everything related to the race. how do you think this will affect the race?

 
Flag Post

I’m sick and tired of the vitriol and nastiness vikaTae. If you would deal with politics without any slight bit of vitriol I could debate this with you. Too bad you’re not worthy of reply at all and I figured that out way too late. I’m still grappling with the idea that somehow listing Obama’s failures and broken promises and listing facts about the economy is not an acceptable argument and how your argument calling me racist and other people racist for wanting immigration reform is acceptable… Don’t bother replying, you’re added to the ignore list with tenco1 and karmakoolkid.

For the record, people are not racist for addressing the fact that Obama is pandering to Latinos just for votes and mentioning the immigration system is broken.

 
Flag Post
How was I playing semantics? You’re half right though, I know what he meant to do, and he did do it, quit being mad.

I’m not mad, I won the argument. Gitmo is still open. There are still prisoners there. The President didn’t want them there still. Case closed.

Shit dude, we’re in a deep hole. We don’t have some WW2 style production boost that we did in the Great Depression, either. As I’m sure you understand, the issue came from people over borrowing. Well, of course now that everybody hates their credit cards, there isn’t much confidence in becoming an entrepreneur and having to take a 100k++ loan to start your own business. That means there’s little desire for anyone to create jobs.

Partly. The larger problem is that banks and corporations are holding on to ridiculous amounts of capital because they are so unsure of what is going to happen. There is no stability at all, which both parties are to blame. Could banks be lending now? Absolutely. Could businesses be hiring and expanding more now? Absolutely. But, until there is some stability, that won’t happen, at least not on a large enough scale to make a difference.

In your video, I think Obama was trying to say that he wouldn’t expect much in the way of support if the economy wasn’t recovering. Economic growth/recovery is a process, not a goal. The GDP growth being low would only be something you could argue if inflation was much higher and unemployment wasn’t reducing.

Unemployment is decreasing because people are leaving the labor force – that is, giving up on finding work. So yes, unemployment went down last month, but everyone, even the Democrats, knew that is was abysmal news.

As for inflation – well, the FED just pumped in a bushel of dollars into the economy. More printed dollars = eventual inflation. Sooner or later, it’s going to catch up with us if we continue to operate this way.

 
Flag Post

Unfortunately, Darear is right on one thing. We can list Obama’s failures, and Romney has none, since he hasn’t been a president yet. If Romney makes it as a president, we’ll be back in four years with a list of his failures. Frankly, any president has a list of failures, and any president is given a set situation. It is completely impossible to rule out everything you can’t control and show the decisions he made were completely required at that moment in time.

I find it hardly fair to compare a candidate who already has been a president to a candidate who hasn’t based on what they achieved as a president. At best, you’d be saying “I hope he does not lie and actually makes good decisions”. Then again, it’s a rather silly political system any way, so it’s a little difficult to find a better way. I would say to give Romney four years to be able to criticise both at an equal level. It’s the only way to reliably claim any of them is “better”.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Darkruler2005:

I would say to give Romney four years to be able to criticise both at an equal level.

Sounds good to me. At least that way if the economy hasn’t started to turn around at that point, we can safely conclude that it’s an immovable beast, regardless of the political persuasion (Repubs or Democrats) running it.

 
Flag Post

Wow, it’s very fortuitous that we’re, at this very point, talking about Romney’s “worthiness” to serve as President for ALL Americans…..in particular 47% of them
BUT, ya wanna see//hear THIS first.

Enjoy.
Aren’t the rich ppl such great ppl.
I wish I could afford $50,000 for a dinner to support an ass like Romney.
Does a lot of that shit Romney is spewing sound a lot like what our boy, jake-0, so very often touts?