Jump to content

Presidential Race (Respector Edition)


Recommended Posts

I'm not sure if the moderators will tolerate another foray into the inflammatory world of contemporary American politics, but I enjoyed many of the exchanges in the last one. I for one find debating with someone with a different perspective to be challenging, invigorating and often informative. I for one can get a bit carried away and respond in a way that is too flippant to advance the conversation, so I would like to promote a forum where we can challenge each other to moderate our feelings with logic and share our perspectives as election season draws closer.

 

Maybe we can start with a look at our two main candidates strengths and weaknesses:

 

Obama

 

Strengths:

He's an incumbent, they are historically difficult to defeat.

Many citizens are fond of his Affordable Care Act.

He has made good to some degree on his promises of ending both wars.

He takes credit for "Getting Bin Laden."

The economy has made modest gains while he is in office, at the least a certain damage control can be attributed to him.

 

Weaknesses

Many citizens resent the Affordable Care Act, most importantly the mandate.

Wealthy citizens are wary of his plans to raise their tax rate.

The economy has not grown as promised.

Some of the public perceive him as a socialist/extremist.

 

Romney

 

Strengths:

Incredible fund raising abilities.

A potential "main stream" Republican candidate for a right wing that dislikes Obama's agenda (i.e. anybody but Obama).

Business savvy could be considered an asset.

Wealthy citizens see him as an ally to keep their tax rates low, or even lower them.

Military ambitions could gain favor with pro military citizens.

 

Weaknesses:

Some of the public perceive him as an out of touch aristocrat.

Drama surrounding his tax records and his reluctance to show them.

He's running against a health care plan similar to the one he signed in as governor of Massachusetts.

The tax plan he released is seen as favoring the rich and costing working families more money.

 

 

I'm sure this is missing all kinds of things. Please pitch in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think you covered most of it.

 

As an Obama supporter, I am loathe to add to the "Weaknesses" list, but one that occurred to me is the enthusiasm gap within the base. I will admit that, although I campaigned for him in '08, I am much less likely to do so now....even though I'm in the swing state of Florida. They have already called me and asked twice, and I am still telling them, "I'll get back to you." :lol

 

Honestly, I prefer to get paid for my work, and they aren't offering. I may decide in October to make some calls, but not really feeling it. I suppose if Romney gains traction after the bilious convention here in Tampa, I will have to reconsider...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it would be easy to add to, or expand on, the Romney "Weaknesses" list, too.

 

What has the guy done since he left office in 2007, with what wikipedia describes as an approval rating of "34 percent in November 2006, his rating level ranked 48th of the 50 U.S. governors?" Run for office. I suspect that even most of the people voting for him would describe him as "a typical politician, lies constantly, will say anything to get elected."

 

I see him as offensive and unacceptable on many levels, but the "out of touch aristocrat" one is probably the most egregious. I don't think he's got any actual appealing qualities, but among his most unappealing qualities is his apparent inability to connect with anyone unless they own a baseball team or run a Swiss bank. He truly seems unable to care about, or even comprehend, the normal trials and tribulations of even the middle class, much less the poor. And, what makes him truly potentially dangerous is that no one can really say what any of his core beliefs are, because he has changed his mind about nearly everything at one time or another. Consequently, he is surely capable of surrounding himself with the same neocon advisers that made George W. Bush's presidency such a fun-filled time of American adventurism in the Middle East.

 

A look at his foreign policy advisors, like Robert Kagan, John Bolton, and Eric Edelman, shows that Romney would only polish his "severely conservative" credentials more once he was in office. For that last reason alone - even if I were to consider him as a potential candidate - the likelihood that a Romney administration would get us into an utterly disastrous war in Iran would be enough to stop me in my tracks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose it would be easy to add to, or expand on, the Romney "Weaknesses" list, too.

 

What has the guy done since he left office in 2007, with what wikipedia describes as an approval rating of "34 percent in November 2006, his rating level ranked 48th of the 50 U.S. governors?" Run for office. I suspect that even most of the people voting for him would describe him as "a typical politician, lies constantly, will say anything to get elected."

 

I see him as offensive and unacceptable on many levels, but the "out of touch aristocrat" one is probably the most egregious. I don't think he's got any actual appealing qualities, but among his most unappealing qualities is his apparent inability to connect with anyone unless they own a baseball team or run a Swiss bank. He truly seems unable to care about, or even comprehend, the normal trials and tribulations of even the middle class, much less the poor. And, what makes him truly potentially dangerous is that no one can really say what any of his core beliefs are, because he has changed his mind about nearly everything at one time or another. Consequently, he is surely capable of surrounding himself with the same neocon advisers that made George W. Bush's presidency such a fun-filled time of American adventurism in the Middle East.

 

A look at his foreign policy advisors, like Robert Kagan, John Bolton, and Eric Edelman, shows that Romney would only polish his "severely conservative" credentials more once he was in office. For that last reason alone - even if I were to consider him as a potential candidate - the likelihood that a Romney administration would get us into an utterly disastrous war in Iran would be enough to stop me in my tracks.

 

Can I copy and paste this to facebook to shut my right-winged friends up? Seriously, this is very well said.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right there. In addition there is no difference between the two. People need to escape the two party, left/right paradigm or we will all be screwed (we are already)...

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38

 

7696087510_d0d1912d78_b3.jpg

 

Well done. It amazes me that America has been strong armed into only having two options for the leader of our country for all these years. I'd also love to see these guys get one shot, single term. Give em six years if we need to but this 3 year campaign every incumbent runs while in office is a serious waste of our time and money. Also if your voting straight down one party your probably being fooled and consider yourself a pawn.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right there. In addition there is no difference between the two. People need to escape the two party, left/right paradigm or we will all be screwed (we are already)...

 

It's interesting. I could not disagree more with your first statement, and I couldn't agree more with your second. I see too many corporate/lobbyist influences between the two, but very different potential for the country.

 

To say that they are the same, would be the same as saying Obama is just like Bush. You could talk about how many people died from drone strikes, and you'd be right (too many). But that does not make Obama's military approach anything like Bush's. We already know Obama is interested in moderating the pentagon budget, in order to balance the budget. We already know Romney wants to start a new era of greater military strength for the U.S.

 

No cleverly edited soundclip on youtube is going to convince me that these two men would have the same effect on our nation and the world abroad. That strikes me as an irresponsible overreach in attempt to argue for much needed systemic changes in American politics. So in other words: to me that's a bad message with good intentions.

 

I guess what I'm saying is at their absolute worst they are the same. But Obama's best is of a different ilk.

 

I agree that our two party system is absurd, but I've watched like-minded friends "boycott" the vote for years, and somehow that never seems to change anything.

 

I also agree that the 3 year campaign is ridiculous.

 

If someone can think of an effective way for me to use my voice to change our political system they can have my signature. I'm not smart enough to pretend to know how that happens. I am smart enough to know that not voting for the best potential candidate will not help change our country.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will only vote for candidates that support the Constitution, the principle of sound money, personal liberty and privacy, and peace. It's that simple. Not too many of them out there. The expansion of US militarism overseas through the world army of NATO, endless drone attacks against a phantom enemy we have killed hundreds of times over but who unbelievably get US support in the way of weapons and money in Libya and Syria, bombing countries without congressional approval, the failed war on drugs, a continuous stream of executive orders that sidestep Congress and deprive us of our liberties, assassination of American citizens without due process, expansion of the welfare state, endless corporate and bank bailouts, trillions of dollars of growing debt, the continuing debasement of our currency through our debt based monetary system, the surrender of our national sovereignty to international treaties and organizations, the destruction of free market capitalism, government spying and prying on our private lives, sexual assaults every time you fly on an airplane, the list goes on and on. Enough is enough. It's not just the executive branch. it's the whole pack of elected thieves, scoundrels and corporate puppets that pass themselves off as our representatives that I cannot in my good conscience cast my vote for any longer. The fact that you can't trust your vote will be counted, as you intended, is another issue. The game is rigged by the two party mafia and I refuse to participate any longer. The lesser of two evils is still evil. And I'm not sure either candidate is the lesser. They are both financed by Goldman-Sachs and surround themselves with neocon advisers. Where is the choice in that? No matter who wins we all lose. What if they held an election and no one showed up? I opt out.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely understand that not voting is not the answer but either is contributing to something you don't believe in. I've just had it with picking the lesser of two evils. Last year I voted anti-Palin...not pro-Obama. I couldn't see the country being a McCain heart attack or stomach virus away from her being commander in chief. The vote before was for Kerry and a vote for damage control from Bush. I've yet to really love a presidential candidate since I was able to vote and with the two parties getting more extreme each year it doesn't look like I'm going to. If I don't vote this year it will be the first time for me in a presidential election and I won't feel guilty.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was more than ready and eager to vote for Ron Paul but we know how that turned out. I even changed my party affiliation to vote for him in the CT primary. The deck was stacked against him from the beginning. His own party hates him. That's one reason why I like him. They fear his ideas and his solutions to the problems. Hard choices have to be made. But, I believe we are past the point of no return for this current economic system. The dominoes are falling one by one and we are the biggest. It is only a matter of time. For a good concise and easy read to gain an understanding of this situation please read "Dishonest Money" by Joseph Plummer. It is a great read no matter what your political persuasion. Nothing wrong with broadening your knowledge and understanding of the root causes of our current situation.

 

Link:

http://www.amazon.com/Dishonest-Money-Financing-Road-Ruin/dp/1439214115

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sparky, thank you for giving some really honest, detailed posts. I share a lot of your fears and I think it's important to have some other voices in our conversation (if not in our system) to break up the perspective between the old GOP vs DEM conversations.

 

I also agree that unchecked bank gambling has left our dollar a lot less sound.

 

How do you feel about the green light on auditing the federal reserve? There must be some satisfaction in that, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Senate has not voted on it yet if I'm not mistaken. Reid is refusing to bring it to the floor. Obama would veto it anyway, unfortunately. At least some are talking about such matters. Kucinich gave a rousing impassioned speech in favor of it last week. Give Ron Paul credit where credit is due. At least he understands the ramifications of a private banking cartel running our monetary system, at least until recently, in complete secrecy. Every dollar they create physically or digitally and lend to the government comes with interest attached that you and I and future generations will be paying in taxes or through inflation. We are talking trillions here. All created out of thin air with nothing backing it except their word that it is worth something.

 

Kucinich:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFdre0U38qc

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to get beyond right wing and left wing, folks. This is a distraction that allows the political party mafia to divide us while they divide the loot. We all believe in freedom, liberty, capitalism, peace, personal privacy, sound money, private property, national sovereignty, etc., etc. They don't. They only pay lip service to them. We all have a lot more in common than we all believe. Romney and Obama are different sides of the same coin. Both were selected by the oligarchs that run this country or they wouldn't be where they are today. Who ever wins, it doesn't matter to them because they both are controlled by the same people. They both believe in big government. They both believe in the welfare state. They both support the militarism of the US and NATO. They both support the bank bailouts. They both support the printing of trillions of dollars by the Fed to pay for wars, bailouts, welfare state, etc. They both oppose sound money. They both support the growing security police state we are living in. Do you get it??? There is no difference between the two. They only differ in the matter of the degree in which they wish to implement these common principles which are wholeheartedly supported by the military-industrial complex and their financial oligarch backers. We need a game changer or we are doomed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We have to get beyond right wing and left wing, folks. This is a distraction that allows the political party mafia to divide us while they divide the loot. We all believe in freedom, liberty, capitalism, peace, personal privacy, sound money, private property, national sovereignty, etc., etc. They don't. They only pay lip service to them. We all have a lot more in common than we all believe. Romney and Obama are different sides of the same coin. Both were selected by the oligarchs that run this country or they wouldn't be where they are today. Who ever wins, it doesn't matter to them because they both are controlled by the same people. They both believe in big government. They both believe in the welfare state. They both support the militarism of the US and NATO. They both support the bank bailouts. They both support the printing of trillions of dollars by the Fed to pay for wars, bailouts, welfare state, etc. They both oppose sound money. They both support the growing security police state we are living in. Do you get it??? There is no difference between the two. They only differ in the matter of the degree in which they wish to implement these common principles which are wholeheartedly supported by the military-industrial complex and their financial oligarch backers. We need a game changer or we are doomed.

 

so boring and so VERY VERY wrong

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have friends on the left and right. I ignore many of those who make FB a mainly political forum, especially when they're mostly posting empty rhetoric. I have a few friends on both sides of the aisle I like to engage because we can do so in a constructive manner. One FB friend went from being a pretty liberal guy in HS to a raging tea partier now. I used to argue on the right of him, now I argue (probably hard for many to believe hear) way to the left of me. We keep it mostly civil and it hasn't affected our relationship adversely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...