|
Post by Clint Johnston on Sept 27, 2012 20:15:36 GMT 1
Might as well have a thread for it since it's going back & forth in a dozen minor threads... Am I right? Anyhow, since I saw this link I thought I would share it even if I think it's mostly hyperbole. It is interesting how little effort has been expended on Obama's behalf when 4 years ago everybody was working on it. omg.yahoo.com/blogs/now/yahoo-exclusive-see-samuel-l-jackson-pro-obama-120110618.html(Samuel L Jackson - in case you didn't catch it!) I'm no Romney fan, but Obama is no angel, and to assume that Romney will do all the things Jackson asserts whilst assuming that Obama won't (Case in point, his extending the Patriot act and refusal to close Guantanamo Bay) is folly and the hypocrisy annoys me. That and cussing kids. Really?
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Sept 27, 2012 20:50:02 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Lily Ariel Linders on Sept 27, 2012 20:53:42 GMT 1
I might just stay silent in this thread; I'm a rather staunch Obama fan - even though, as a Canadian, I have no say in the US Elections...
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Sept 27, 2012 21:03:07 GMT 1
One of the wonderful things about having your own radio show is the ability to vet your callers before giving them airtime. Just sayin'
All seriousness aside, when are you guys gonna stop voting for the lesser evil and try a 3rd party on for size? All you are getting down there is a different bouquet of manure when you vote for the same 2 guys over and over.
It only seems that way up here. The top 2 parties have mutated a lot over the decades. The right wing is completely different now than it was when I was only a little younger. The left wing and centrists are about to get shaken up in a similar way. Then again that didn't really work out for us soo....
yeah never mind carry on.
|
|
|
Post by Clint Johnston on Sept 27, 2012 21:03:17 GMT 1
Why so? I'm not for either of them at the moment. Is it his stance on women's rights? Why do you think he will make a good President (or more of one). One of the wonderful things about having your own radio show is the ability to vet your callers before giving them airtime. Just sayin' All seriousness aside, when are you guys gonna stop voting for the lesser evil and try a 3rd party on for size? All you are getting down there is a different bouquet of manure. I was all set to vote for Ron Paul until he got thrown out on his ass. Right now it matters not what I think, since my state is solidly Blue, and will definitely go for the present President.
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Sept 27, 2012 21:12:03 GMT 1
The Electoral College doesn't really allow for a third party in its current form. It's possible, but it would take something hugely negative happening to both the Democrats and Republicans for a third party to gain power. Currently, they're just there to mess with votes, and were (probably) the reason Bush won in 2000.
I think the last third party candidate we had in office was Lincoln. >.<
|
|
|
Post by jklinders on Sept 27, 2012 21:50:37 GMT 1
Lincoln was Republican wasn't he? *checks google* Yep, a Republican.
The only reason a third party has no chance is because everybody is spooked into this half brained notion that a third party vote is wasted. It reminds me of that Halloween Simpsons episode where the aliens masqueraded as political candidates and when they were outed they sneered at the suggestion "what are you going to do, waste your vote?" so because of this malarky you keep the same poison in power in different flavors.
So the grassroots movements in the US only work for the existing 2 parties? Damn but your nation has fallen
The current governing party up here started as a grass roots movement in the 80s and 90s around the idea of small government and greater powers to the provinces. It has mutated a couple of times with the currents of political fortune but it's core values remain. They started with one seat in 1993 and now they are in charge. It can happen. It just takes the balls to pull it off.
I can't stand most of what they stand for but they were successful. It can work. Try it on for size.
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Sept 27, 2012 22:09:59 GMT 1
I think a third party could come to power, but it would just take time. The Electoral College is formatted so that each state gets a certain number of electoral votes, and whichever candidate/incumbent gets 270 of those votes wins the presidency. California, for instance, being the largest state has 55 (?) votes. Whoever wins the majority in California, which is largely a Democratic state, wins all 55 votes, adding to their total.
All 55, so, really, in a "Blue State" like California, Republican votes are ignored by and large. This is why candidates tend to rally in "swing states" where the vote could go either way. A third party would have to rise above a system that, for all intents and purposes, is kinda wacky.
Really wacky.
And yeah, Lincoln was a Republican, but Republicans were actually the "third party" at the time, made up of ex-Whigs who were dissatisfied with slavery.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Sept 27, 2012 22:18:34 GMT 1
I like Obama. I like pretty much all of his positions. If I were in the US, I'd be with him all the way. Why you fools didn't take his health care revolution, I will never know. He'd have done great things these last four years if you'd let him.
But then again, being as I am distinnctly leftist, I'd be extremely unlikely to vote Republican. There seem to be far fewer hardline voters in the US than where I live, which is interesting. A lot of voting on who has the best personality, who seems the most impressive in his record... where I come from, you're either left, right or ignorant, in which case your vote unfortunately makes a lot of difference.
I guess moderation in politics is a good thing. I'm very annoyed by people who attach themselves to a party and stick to it like glue for the sake of identity or tribalism. But on the other hand - I think I dislike people much more who vote for a President because they think he seems handsome and confident or recently handled something well or gave a good speech. Where's the crime in always voting Democrat because.... you know, you agree with the Democrats?
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Sept 27, 2012 22:33:43 GMT 1
I guess moderation in politics is a good thing. I'm very annoyed by people who attach themselves to a party and stick to it like glue for the sake of identity or tribalism. But on the other hand - I think I dislike people much more who vote for a President because they think he seems handsome and confident or recently handled something well or gave a good speech. Where's the crime in always voting Democrat because.... you know, you agree with the Democrats? Unfortunately, this sums up most American voters. They don't vote on issues, they vote on very... outward... outlying... things. I've known people who vote purely on which candidate they could see themselves having a beer with, and others who will vote with their party without even listening to debates, etc. etc. I'm pretty liberal, but there were a few conservative candidates who I could've seen myself voting for this year. But as long as the Republican Party keeps picking people who insist that the First Amendment and the Treaty of Tripoli do not exist, I can't do it. =(
|
|
|
Post by Cali on Sept 28, 2012 3:35:16 GMT 1
Gonna vote for Gary Johnson (Libertarian ticket). Like I, he wants a (hopefully) better less bureaucratic health care reformation plan, wants to help out the private sector, and unlike a shocking portion of American conservatives doesn't believe in blaming victims of rape or racial discrimination/hate crimes, believes homosexuals really aren't the scum of the earth and supports their rights, believes illegal immigrants have been beneficial to the American economy (and aren't all collectively members of MS-13 and La Familia Michoacana), and doesn't get a chubby at the idea of having new nations for America to spontaneously invade.
He ain't perfect, obviously, though I've never known a candidate who is.
|
|
|
Post by herrwozzeck on Sept 28, 2012 4:54:21 GMT 1
I like Obama. I like pretty much all of his positions. If I were in the US, I'd be with him all the way. Why you fools didn't take his health care revolution, I will never know. Probably because when he passed Obamacare, everyone on the far right started shouting "Communist, he's a dirty commie". Calling someone a 'communist' has always been a favorite fear-mongering tool of the far right since the days of McCarthyism, and unfortunately we haven't seemed to grow out of it yet. Personally, I think Washington corrupted Obama, and not for the better either. But I'd rather have Obama in office than Romney, since Obama at least stands for more than "saying this'll get me elected in this election!" Seriously, the Romney campaign has become a laughing stock to both me and my libertarian friends (of which I happen to have quite a few). And to be quite honest, I think this whole election year is a show of how far the GOP has fallen that these candidates think they have to cater to the most extreme elements of their parties (that, I might add, used to be fringe elements of these parties) to get elected. Seriously, I cannot stand the current GOP, and especially in their social issues. (And for reference: yes, I am more the guy who votes for social issues than economic issues.)
|
|
|
Post by CAPT Issac R. Madden on Sept 28, 2012 5:37:15 GMT 1
I'm probably going to get flamed to hell for this, but I'll rank Obama to be along the lines of Neville Chamberlain as far as foreign policy goes. Constantly apologizing and trying to appease a known aggressive element in the international scene. Because that worked so well in 1930s Europe
Domestically, his much-vaunted health care system takes the worst elements of both privatized and socialized healthcare. It's a system where you have to buy insurance or suffer a heafty tax (which is techincally unconstitional since the health care bill didn't originate in our House of Represntative where all taxes are REQUIRED to be written). Basically if you're a citizen, you must prove you have insurance, but you don't have to prove you're a citizen. Also, there are states dealing with voters who are illegally registered (mainly illgeal aliens from what I've seen) who, coincidentally, vote Democrat.
The attack in Libya? Multiple reports show that the White House knew within 24 hours (per reports from everyone in the Intel community who had assets in place) that it was a coordinated assault from militant groups alligned with Al Qai'da, but the President is still trying to thump on the "protest against the Youtube video" book. Also, the guy who made the video was arrested on several charges, one of which being "unauthorized access to the Internet".
Obama claims that he "inheirited the greatest deficit in history". Either he got elected in 1944, or he's lying. The deficit in '43 was 30% of the economy at the time; in 08 it was around 3%. It's currently above 10% since 2009.
His solution to the economic situation? "Tax the rich", nevermind that if you taxed the elite at a 100% rate, you'd have enough money to run our government for maybe 10 weeks, if that. Also consider that Obama has borrowed and spent in 3.5 years what took Bush 8 years to spend.
And I'm not going to get too far into the weeds of the President "not having time" to meet with foreign heads of state during a global crisis, but finds time to be on talk shows like Letterman, Saturday Night Live, The View, etc.
Romney's no picnic, but I'm thinking several moves ahead: if Romney wins, that means there's a better shot at getting a Paul Ryan/Rand Paul ticket down the road.
|
|
|
Post by Battlechantress on Sept 28, 2012 12:55:46 GMT 1
My state doesn't allow for write-in balloting, so I'm stuck hating both choices that I'm given. And they damn sure don't want any third party options (hell, there's really only one party running things out here anyway).
|
|
|
Post by Warhammer Gorvar on Sept 28, 2012 13:03:06 GMT 1
My state doesn't allow for write-in balloting, so I'm stuck hating both choices that I'm given. And they damn sure don't want any third party options (hell, there's really only one party running things out here anyway).
|
|