Presidential Race (Respector Edition)

[uncool2pillow]

I call myself a Republican becuase they narrowly (quite narrowly) are closer to my views than Democrats. I feel like I'm more of an independent, but I want to participate in primaries and caucuses. I don't have to acknowledge or agree with anything.

[KevinG]

I call myself a Republican becuase they narrowly (quite narrowly) are closer to my views than Democrats. I feel like I'm more of an independent, but I want to participate in primaries and caucuses. I don't have to acknowledge or agree with anything.

 

I guess I would have a problem calling myself something or being part of group whose stated beliefs I don't agree with. Or at the very minimum I refuse to acknowledge that these are their beliefs.

 

I think you misunderstood my use of "you." I was using it as the plural. Thing, those candidates who have the R after their name, they get money, they support the republican party. In some part they are ok with the platform. And if you vote for a republican, you may not agree with everything, but at the minimum you have to understand that the person you are voting for stands for the beliefs and policies of that party.

[lost highway]

I call myself a Republican becuase they narrowly (quite narrowly) are closer to my views than Democrats. I feel like I'm more of an independent, but I want to participate in primaries and caucuses. I don't have to acknowledge or agree with anything.

 

This is the funny thing about the rigidity of our two party system. If you associate with a particular party you label yourself with its values (even if you don't share them).

 

Republican is supposed to mean:

 

Business over the environment.

Business over unions.

Social programs make people lazy, and are unjust.

Lower taxes help the nation prosper.

 

Democrat is supposed to mean:

 

Environmental stewardship.

Union protection against business power.

Social programs in order for all people to have the opportunity to prosper.

A level of taxation is necessary to have a productive and prosperous nation.

 

Now, I am sure every person on here would take each of these broad-side-of-a-barn approaches to governance to a different degree. They falsely represent two choices, when in reality there is a myriad of choices based on the degree of each situation and the related measure in question. It seems much more pragmatic to be an independent (that's why I'm an independent) but you are forced to ghettoize yourself somewhat if you don't jump on one of two buses.

[Winston Legthigh]

I guess I would have a problem calling myself something or being part of group whose stated beliefs I don't agree with.

 

It's easier than you think.

 

When the dudes in the white short sleeve shirts and black ties come to my door to talk about Jesus, I tell them "It's quite alright, I'm Catholic." Do I believe in everything that Catholicism espouses? No. Am I Catholic? According to the three sacraments (baptism, communion, confirmation) I received, I am.

[bleedorange]

How is this so difficult to understand? Even at the REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, there will be REPUBLICAN delegates there who still support Ron Paul. When party leaders decide on a platform, they don't all walk into the room and agree on everything 100%. I would actually be very surprised that anyone identifying as a Democrat or Republican agrees with everything that particular party stands for.

[Sparky speaks]

Ain't no difference twixt the two...

 

The VP candidates agreed on 52 substantive bills

 

Partisan politics drives us to look at differences. But during the time Rep. Paul Ryan served along side then-Sen. Joe Biden from 1999 to 2008, our VP candidates voted the same way on 52 substantive bills.

Here are the 52 bills which the two candidates both supported:

 

http://www.govtrack.us/blog/2012/08/15/vp-candidates-agreed-on-substantive-bills/

[ih8music]

So of the roughly 40,000 bills introduced and roughly 2,500 bills passed during that period, they agreed 52 times. Yes, they are identical.

[LouieB]

The "no differnce between candidates" drum is kinda boring. If the legistlative branch of this country works correctly, both parties DO vote the same way on most bills and get them out of Congress and into law. Also there are HUNDREDS of bills that go through Congress so at least part of the time even under the worst of circumstances, folks on both opposite sides of the aisle vote the same way. Big dea.

 

On the other side of the coin, Ryan isn't all that conservative when it comes to spending money the way he wants to spend it.

 

LouieB

 

So of the roughly 40,000 bills introduced and roughly 2,500 bills passed during that period, they agreed 52 times. Yes, they are identical.

Really. Sorry to step on your post, but clearly this is like not a story AT ALL.

 

The purpose of government is NOT to stop shit, but to do shit. Back to civics class for Sparky.

 

LouieB

[Guest Jules]

Is Romney the first Presidential candidate in history to use swiss bank accounts to handle his tax obligations in the US?? If so should people know that? Does it matter? Should he be pissing and moaning about people taking welfare money if he isnt even paying his share?

 

Probably not, and it's irrelevant.

 

By what logic is he not "paying his share?"

[Sparky speaks]

Lou, sorry to bore you again. No matter where you stand on the issues mentioned below, they are both the same, no matter how much you deny it. Where is the choice? Why should anyone vote for one over the other? Party affiliation? Race? One's less rich than the other? One might be a legal citizen of the US? This election, like most is like choosing between Coke or Pepsi. It doesn't matter. They are both bad for you...

 

The following are 40 ways that Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are essentially the same candidate….

 

1. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported TARP.

 

2. Mitt Romney supported Barack Obama’s “economic stimulus” packages.

 

3. Mitt Romney says that Barack Obama’s bailout of the auto industry was actually his idea.

 

4. Neither candidate supports immediately balancing the federal budget.

 

5. They both believe in big government and they both have a track record of being big spenders while in office.

 

6. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both fully support the Federal Reserve.

 

7. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are both on record as saying that the president should not question the “independence” of the Federal Reserve.

 

8. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both said that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke did a good job during the last financial crisis.

 

9. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both felt that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke deserved to be renominated to a second term.

 

10. Both candidates oppose a full audit of the Federal Reserve.

 

11. Both candidates are on record as saying that U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has done a good job.

 

12. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney have both been big promoters of universal health care.

 

13. Mitt Romney was the one who developed the plan that Obamacare was later based upon.

 

14. Wall Street absolutely showers both candidates with campaign contributions.

 

15. Neither candidate wants to eliminate the income tax or the IRS.

 

16. Both candidates want to keep personal income tax rates at the exact same levels for the vast majority of Americans.

 

17. Both candidates are “open” to the idea of imposing a Value Added Tax on the American people.

 

18. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the TSA is doing a great job.

 

19. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported the NDAA.

 

20. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both supported the renewal of the Patriot Act.

 

21. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the federal government should be able to indefinitely detain American citizens that are considered to be terrorists.

 

22. Both candidates believe that American citizens suspected of being terrorists can be killed by the president without a trial.

 

23. Barack Obama has not closed Guantanamo Bay like he promised to do, and Mitt Romney actually wants to double the number of prisoners held there.

 

24. Both candidates support the practice of “extraordinary rendition”.

 

25. They both support the job-killing “free trade” agenda of the global elite.

 

26. They both accuse each other of shipping jobs out of the country and both of them are right.

 

27. Both candidates are extremely soft on illegal immigration.

 

28. Neither candidate has any military experience. This is the first time that this has happened in a U.S. election since 1944.

 

29. Both candidates earned a degree from Harvard University.

 

30. They both believe in the theory of man-made global warming.

 

31. Mitt Romney has said that he will support a “cap and trade” carbon tax scheme (like the one Barack Obama wants) as longas the entire globe goes along with it.

 

32. Both candidates have a very long record of supporting strict gun control measures.

 

33. Both candidates have been pro-abortion most of their careers. Mitt Romney’s “conversion” to the pro-life cause has been questioned by many. In fact, Mitt Romney has made millions on Bain Capital’s investment in a company called “Stericycle” that incinerates aborted babies collected from family planning clinics.

 

34. Barack Obama and Mitt Romney both believe that the Boy Scout ban on openly gay troop leaders is wrong.

 

35. They both believe that a “two state solution” will bring lasting peace between the Palestinians and Israel.

 

36. Both candidates have a history of nominating extremely liberal judges.

 

37. Like Barack Obama, Mitt Romney also plans to add “signing statements” to bills when he signs them into law.

 

38. They both have a horrible record when it comes to job creation.

 

39. Both candidates believe that the president has the power to take the country to war without getting the approval of the U.S. Congress.

 

40. Both candidates plan to continue running up more government debt even though the U.S. government is already 16 trillion dollars in debt.

 

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/40-points-that-prove-that-barack-obama-and-mitt-romney-are-exactly-the-same

 

[choo-choo-charlie]

I've always gotten a kick out of South Park's take on it...every time there's an election.

[Winston Legthigh]

I've always gotten a kick out of South Park's take on it...every time there's an election.

 

It was hoping the link was going to point to the Mormon episode. I think I'll watch that one tonight.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

I loved that SP episode, but I am always hesitant now to bring it up. I think Romney's the douche, but I will be labeled a racist if I say Obama is ... well, never mind.

[IRememberDBoon]

Probably not, and it's irrelevant.

 

By what logic is he not "paying his share?"

 

by the same logic that he is "paying his share"

[uncool2pillow]

, but at the minimum you have to understand that the person you are voting for stands for the beliefs and policies of that party.

Candidate are not beholden to every plank of the platform.

Republican is supposed to mean:

 

Business over the environment.

Business over unions.

Social programs make people lazy, and are unjust.

Lower taxes help the nation prosper.

 

Democrat is supposed to mean:

 

Environmental stewardship.

Union protection against business power.

Social programs in order for all people to have the opportunity to prosper.

A level of taxation is necessary to have a productive and prosperous nation.

This is really such a bad an stupid straw an argument it doesn't warrant any more of a response than that. You define yourself and your opponents by the terms you find most appealing. This is FoxNews level discussion now.

[IRememberDBoon]

Candidate are not beholden to every plank of the platform.

 

This is really such a bad an stupid straw an argument it doesn't warrant any more of a response than that. You define yourself and your opponents by the terms you find most appealing. This is FoxNews level discussion now.

 

sound pretty close to me

[uncool2pillow]

I hate typing on iPads btw. And of course it sounds close to you. I could make a similar list of what Republicans say Dems stand for and what we say we stand for, but it's an insult to your and my intelligence.

[IRememberDBoon]

what does it say thats wrong?

[lost highway]

Candidate are not beholden to every plank of the platform.

 

This is really such a bad an stupid straw an argument it doesn't warrant any more of a response than that. You define yourself and your opponents by the terms you find most appealing. This is FoxNews level discussion now.

 

You should read my post again. Either you didn't understand me, or I explained myself poorly; the point was these are the selling points of the parties- the prescribed narrative. Most people don't fit this. That's the point. I was trying to step outside of party confines.

 

I get that falling right of center in this thread leaves you a bit on your own, and for that reason you add a needed element. Don't be a jerk, this is the respector edition. If you think something doesn't warrant response, don't respond.

 

Now, I am sure every person on here would take each of these broad-side-of-a-barn approaches to governance to a different degree. They falsely represent two choices, when in reality there is a myriad of choices based on the degree of each situation and the related measure in question. It seems much more pragmatic to be an independent (that's why I'm an independent) but you are forced to ghettoize yourself somewhat if you don't jump on one of two buses.

 

This might be the part that was missed.

[uncool2pillow]

You should read my post again. Either you didn't understand me, or I explained myself poorly; the point was these are the selling points of the parties- the prescribed narrative. Most people don't fit this. That's the point. I was trying to step outside of party confines.

 

I get that falling right of center in this thread leaves you a bit on your own, and for that reason you add a needed element. Don't be a jerk, this is the respector edition. If you think something doesn't warrant response, don't respond.

 

 

I try to reply with the same amount of respect each post shows. When you define your opponent by your terms, I find that disrepectful. It's exactly the tactics that Limbaugh and FoxNews use. And IRDB, it doesn't really say anything that's wrong, but it's on the wording and the connotation. For example, I could twist it around to say democrats believe in the environment before jobs.

[lost highway]

You might, and I won't get upset. My goal wasn't to define an opponent, but to demonstrate the overreaching lack of subtlety in the mission statement of two parties.

 

You seemed to feel insulted by my sketch of the going pitch of the republican party, but you missed that I was indicating that your struggle with the party's average M.O. and your attraction to the status of an independent was a sign of intelligence on your part.

 

I don't mind tough questions, that's kind of how this discussion gets good.

 

Is the environment more important than jobs?

 

That's a really reasonable, and difficult question. I know that most jobs last anywhere between a month and 70 years, and I know the earth lasts longer. I know that I can find another job, but not another planet. Don't get me wrong, I like making money, and I like for other people to be able to do the same. I suppose as a progressive my line would be to describe how environmentally responsible choices, while often less profitable in the short term, are ultimately more economical because sustainable use of natural resources allows them to be harvested indefinitely, as opposed to pillaged and sold immediately. I can see that this doesn't always spell a pay check for everyone, but it seems a fairly sturdy approach.

 

Here are some other questions:

 

Is global warming real/ important?

 

Why would anyone who believes in democracy try and make it harder for minorities to vote?

 

Does nepotism give unfair advantages in upward mobility?

 

Does someone from a violent and impoverished neighborhood have the same chance of attaining the American dream as other people?

 

I like talking to Republicans about these things because they are vexing (to me). There is probably a two dimensional party line answer for every one of these questions, but as your distaste for caricature shows, you are someone who is thoughtful.

[uncool2pillow]

You miss my point entirely. I don't think that's what Dems believe, but that's how a republican might label a democrat to sound negative the way you labeled Republican views.

 

To try to answer your questions quickly, I'm tired.

 

1. Yes and yes, so let's consider nuclear among other non carbon energy sources.

2. Where that is the real motive (in Iowa the republican secretary of state and dem atty gen are working together to purge voter rosters) they're asses.

3. Yes, but govt intrusion to stop things like this have other negative effects.

4. See answer #3. Only less so here. There are ways govt can address poverty.

 

Those were good and fair questions. Good night.

 

[KevinG]

Are you F'ing Serious Mitt?

 

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/romney-birtherism-joke-michigan

 

Yes I know it was a joke. But it plays to the worst part of the anti-Obama rhetoric. It was in poor taste and shows that Mitt will play to far right wing. I don't know if I have ever seen or heard of a candidate in the modern era to move more right or left after sewing up the parties nomination.

[choo-choo-charlie]

 

 

It was hoping the link was going to point to the Mormon episode. I think I'll watch that one tonight.

 

Also a GREAT one!

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Are you F'ing Serious Mitt?

 

http://www.motherjon...m-joke-michigan

Yes I know it was a joke. But it plays to the worst part of the anti-Obama rhetoric. It was in poor taste and shows that Mitt will play to far right wing. I don't know if I have ever seen or heard of a candidate in the modern era to move more right or left after sewing up the parties nomination.

Great article.

And just to show that we are more civil here on Via Chicago than the people on TV, here is Chris Matthews totally ripping Rance Priebus about this issue. Pure awesomeness.

http://news.yahoo.co...-145819601.html