US Elections 2012 Part II: The Conventions, Debates and Election results

[Urzu 7]

Someone said "the hope and change stuff with Obama wore out" and I'd like to say that I think Obama wanted to really try to do good for the country but he just got sucked into and crunched up by the gears of the American political machine.

[Lost Cause]

Originally Posted by Xacual

So you want the government to stop repairing roads and bridges, stop providing social security, stop providing for education, stop providing for medicare, etc, etc, etc?

Did I say that? NO I DIDN'T! What I said is I'm in favor of Gov't stating out of my personal business, letting ME choose my healthcare provider, and letting ME do my own thinking in what's best for me! Hell they already want to disable medicare, social security is damn near broke, the states get the funds for roads and bridges if they don't get squandered or put into corrupt politicians pockets, same with education! Look at Illinois and their problems, corruption seems to run rampant there.

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by Xacual

So you want the government to stop repairing roads and bridges, stop providing social security, stop providing for education, stop providing for medicare, stop providing relief aid for natural disasters, etc, etc?

Watch it, your straw man is burning.
What she is talking about is getting the fucking government out of our personal lives.
Like telling us what kinds of light bulbs we can buy, what we can or cannot say, what we can or cannot own, what kinds of food we can eat (and I Don't mean safety issues), what kind of healthcare we can have, what kind of car we can buy or should own.
That kind of bullshit coming out of the statists and corporatists in our country is what pisses people like Lost Cause and me off.
I don't want to live in the police-state we see being errected all around us under the falacious monicker of progress.
It's retro-gressive at best, back to the days of feudal Europe and Americans want none of it.
So knock off the tired and worn out meme of "you don't want public utilities, police, firemen, etc." because it's a load of crap and we know it.

Also unemployment is not at 10% anymore, it's at 7.8%, it has never been calculated considering the people that have stopped looking. You can complain about that all you want but that's the truth, Republican or Democrat, it's always been that way.

Actual numbers put U-6 at 14.7%.
U-6 is what has been used to determine unemployment/underemployment since the great depression era.
Only recently has U-3 been used as some kind of measure of economic health.
The U-3 number is a measure of only those on unemployment benefits looking for work, it does not count those out of work (off unemployment), those not eligible for unemployment, or those that are either underemployed or without work entirely.
The U-3 has been so badly manipulated and tossed about as some indicator of the state of our economy as to be laughable at this point.

[Vexx]

Problem is, the same people who "want the government out of our lives" are the ones who seem okay with the government burrowing into our bedrooms (who we love and marry), women's rights (equal pay for equal work), and a woman's right over her own body (reproductive control). They're ... inconsistent

[Solace]

Your rights end where mine begin. That line tends to move a lot though.

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by Vexx

Problem is, the same people who "want the government out of our lives" are the ones who seem okay with the government burrowing into our bedrooms (who we love and marry), women's rights (equal pay for equal work), and a woman's right over her own body (reproductive control). They're ... inconsistent

I lump them all in together.
That's why I said "statists and corporatists" they both want control of our person, whether it's telling us who we can marry or whether we can own a gun, they're trying to control us because they falsely believe they know better than we do.
Again, this is why I wish people would stop voting for Republicrats and Democans.
Just because the social issues Romney wants to control are different then those of Obama, doesn't mean Obama's social policies are any less intrusive or better.
And there in lies the problem, they are both identical in their desire to control us.
I don't care whether it's contraceptives or caffeinated soft drinks, neither political party has the constitutional authority to tell us how to live our lives.

[Xacual]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

Watch it, your straw man is burning.
What she is talking about is getting the fucking government out of our personal lives.
Like telling us what kinds of light bulbs we can buy, what we can or cannot say, what we can or cannot own, what kinds of food we can eat (and I Don't mean safety issues), what kind of healthcare we can have, what kind of car we can buy or should own.
That kind of bullshit coming out of the statists and corporatists in our country is what pisses people like Lost Cause and me off.

I was intentionally exaggerating because the Tea Party politicians I've listened to are absolutely nuts when it comes to cutting budget and spending of government to the point where stuff like that would get severely cut. Yeah I know people don't like to say that those kinds of things would be cut but you can't expect the government to keep up with requirements and then also cut all the funding to them at the same time.

[Vexx]

@GundamFan0083: Aye, the two-axis chart. Some days I think there needs to be a third axis, a "main street vs wall street" axis. To me that sort of covers the puppeteers, the ones who don't really care if things are "left" or "right" so long as they get to keep extracting wealth out of the system.

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by Xacual

I was intentionally exaggerating because the Tea Party politicians I've listened to are absolutely nuts when it comes to cutting budget and spending of government to the point where stuff like that would get severely cut.

Of course they're nuts.
They're all bat-shit-crazy.
They could have bailed out the banks and paid off the morgages of all the citizens in the US at the same time...but they didn't, and both parties are to blame.
Now we have helicopter Ben pushing for QE-Unlimited.
Oh joy.
As if the paper dollar isn't worthless enough already, now it's basically going to be no different than actual monopoly money and both the Repubs and Dems are to blame for this.
On top of this we've got the government buying up ammo like its going out of style, and arming themselves with drones, APCs, machine guns, you get the picture.
Even bubba-joe redneck should be able to see the Empire through the stormtroopers at this point.

[Vexx]

Even my mother, staunch social conservative, anti-abortion, etc. has finally figured out the GOP is not her friend after the first two debates. That's she's a "main street peasant" not actually part of the country club (she's decently well off by middle class standards). She's thinking of voting Libertarian.

[Dr. Casey]

Vexx, can I have your vote for President 2012?

(Thanks for the reply, Solace, I'll answer later.)

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

Vexx, can I have your vote for President 2012?

(Thanks for the reply, Solace, I'll answer later.)

Heh, point me to your position papers and we'll see

[james0246]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

Watch it, your straw man is burning.
What she is talking about is getting the fucking government out of our personal lives.
Like telling us what kinds of light bulbs we can buy, what we can or cannot say, what we can or cannot own, what kinds of food we can eat (and I Don't mean safety issues), what kind of healthcare we can have, what kind of car we can buy or should own

I'm on the fence for this type of issue. There are some things the government is given authority over simply because it is has been deemed for the betterment of society. Beyond infrastructure and basic protections and services (food, etc), the government should be able to prevent its citizens from harming each other unnecessarily. This is why we have drug regulations and laws, this is why we have certain environmental and animal laws, this is why we have generally accepted restrictions on a variety of products and producers, etc.

There are so many things the government does that is partially an "infringement" on our personal rights, but we, as a society, both want and need quite a few of these infringements. That's not to say that the government doesn't go too far at times (the light bulbs that you have mentioned), but there are far more acceptable "infringements" than many on the "get the government out of our lives" side are willing to admit, which in turn annoys many on the left (of course, there are far more unnecessary infringements than the left should be willing to accept).

Originally Posted by Dr. Casey

Vexx, can I have your vote for President 2012?

(Thanks for the reply, Solace, I'll answer later.)

Don't waste your vote on Vexx. You should vote for Max Frost for President. .

Kudos to anyone who gets the reference.

[Jaieni]

[DonQuigleone]

My problem with Romney is that I don't know who he is or what he stands for. The man is an enigma, it's impossible to pin him down to anything. He simultaneously believes in everything, and nothing. I suppose he stands for what is politically expedient.

The only thing he's been consistent on is foreign policy, and as far as I can tell his policy is to use American strength to get whatever it wants everywhere. This, to me, is just bullying. America is blessed with having many natural allies (unlike Russia or China...), and taking that kind of approach is just going to drive them away from you. Look at Bush (who took such an approach), he drove a wedge between America and France and Germany, a big risk to take. Not only that, but of the allies that stuck with him, large sections of their populaces were completely against all of it (particularly in Britain). If you want to shape the world, you don't do it by making enemies.

Under Mitt Romney, I could easily see him unilaterally invading even more countries.

Obama did it right, when he went into Libya, he did it with the full backing of the rest of NATO, meaning that America's share of the fighting was much smaller. The full force of the militaries of Europe were brought to bear, ultimately making for a short conflict. Furthermore, those European states were best placed to work with the new Libyan government going into the future. Now compare that to Iraq.

The United States led by Obama has been pretty popular, and this popularity increases the power of the US as a whole. Obama has done it right.


The problem I see Obama having is Hubris, a big weakness, and responsible I think for many of his failures. You could see his Hubris in the first debate, and I think the 2008 election may have played a big part in it. After the 2008 he may have felt he was granted such a decisive mandate that he failed to plan for any of the difficulties he ended out facing. He was too heady with victory.

Here's hoping he learns to eat humble pie.

[ganbaru]

Obama grabs wide lead among those who have already voted: Reuters/Ipsos poll
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8991FR20121014
This could have a interesting impact.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by Lost Cause

That said, I've seen the debates and frankly am scared to death is Biden were to some how get the Presidency if something happened to Obama!

Curious as to why.

I don't see where Romney deserves all this bad karma, the guy is trying to win the hearts and minds and like any good politician will do what it take too win.

Normal politicians make campaign promises and don't keep them. Romney just says stuff, says the opposite, and then the original again, and doesn't mean it. About everything. No one knows where he truly stands. That's not a good politician, that's a good spy.

Obama had the ability to get things going early on when the Dems controlled the House, but it went nowhere. Then the people voted in a Relublican led House which brought about the Tea Party and an attempt to curtail government interference in our lives...something I'm in favor of!

Democrats aren't a hive mind like the republiborg. And how crashing the country off a cliff is a good thing is beyond me. You realize that "curtailing government interference in our lives" actually caused the country to be downgraded, right? With that whole "give us our tax breaks or the country bankrupts" thing?

"Obamacare" will make you pay for coverage(read it sometime!) and nothing has "gotten better".

You have to pay for coverage now. Why is this different? And yes, things have gotten better.

Romney wants to return to way it was? I Woukd think he knows that IS NOT the answer, as we're still 15 trillion in debt!

A logical person might think that, but who knows if he thinks it's the answer or not? As stated, no one knows what he really thinks.

It's not about race and you know it, it's about the future!

Romney supporters dancing around in KKK outfits, and Romney supporters having fundraisers titled "Put the White back in the Whitehouse" says otherwise.

Originally Posted by Lost Cause

Did I say that? NO I DIDN'T! What I said is I'm in favor of Gov't stating out of my personal business, letting ME choose my healthcare provider, and letting ME do my own thinking in what's best for me! Hell they already want to disable medicare, social security is damn near broke, the states get the funds for roads and bridges if they don't get squandered or put into corrupt politicians pockets, same with education! Look at Illinois and their problems, corruption seems to run rampant there.

Uhm, you can choose your healthcare provider. I don't see why you think you can't. And no, the democrats don't want to disable medicare, that's the GOP that you seem so eager to applaud.

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

What she is talking about is getting the fucking government out of our personal lives.

Then wouldn't the GOP be worse offenders? Considering they're the ones who want to implement laws as to who can marry, what women can do with their bodies, they're the ones who put the individual mandate in Obamacare, etc.

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

or whether we can own a gun

No one is trying to take your guns, unless you're a previous violent offender.

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

As if the paper dollar isn't worthless enough already, now it's basically going to be no different than actual monopoly money and both the Repubs and Dems are to blame for this.

Good thing I've already started looking into changing my money into Canadian dollars, Japanese yen, or British pounds.

[Kaioshin Sama]

Originally Posted by Vexx

@GundamFan0083: Aye, the two-axis chart. Some days I think there needs to be a third axis, a "main street vs wall street" axis. To me that sort of covers the puppeteers, the ones who don't really care if things are "left" or "right" so long as they get to keep extracting wealth out of the system.

That's the truly dangerous element moreso than the religious right, the tea party, hollywood or the NRA for one simple reason, they're smart and they basically control the destiny of the country if left unchecked and that in and of itself is undemocratic. It's no secret which party they support (supports them) so I refuse to support that party...though really I couldn't anyway even if I wanted too.

[james0246]

Everything else aside (besides potential war ), the choice ultimately comes down to who you want creating the next Supreme Court. If you want a Supreme Court that will favour business over individual citizens rights and chooses to accept money as being equal to speech, then choose Romney. If you want a Supreme Court that overemphasizes indivudual rights (sometimes too far), then choose Obama.

Romney supporters dancing around in KKK outfits, and Romney supporters having fundraisers titled "Put the White back in the Whitehouse" says otherwise.

To be fair, there are similar instances with Black Panther organization expressing equal hatred toward white people.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by james0246

To be fair, there are similar instances with Black Panther organization expressing equal hatred toward white people.

Which would only further disprove the "race isn't an issue" argument.