Obama Vs. Romney: 2012 US Election

[randomspot555]

I get what you are saying because I think our understanding and exploration of space and this universe is crucial, but ahh... to want to declare the moon as belonging to the US? That would cause WW3 and I find the idea of any nation owning the moon in any way horrifying actually. I don't think that it would even be a good or intelligent decision to 'industrialize' the moon and build factories there. Maybe some excavation of natural resources but not sending and building corporation sites there for manufacturing common products, etc.

You completely missed the entire point of my post.

 

[Floette]

I'm voting for Obama because hey, he may not be perfect but at least he tried to get things done despite Congressional Republicans working to make him one-term President. It's not like Romney has some better ideas or otherwise he would have told us already what his plans are.

Actually he has laid out his plans.

But generallly your responses are extremely insightful.

From most of your posts, I see a lot of people are choosing not to vote in this election, which is interesting. Again I really dislike some aspects of Romney, but I favor him at the moment due to Obama's four years of failed policies.

I would like to apologize because there are some fantastic points being made hear that I haven't responded to due to being pressed for time. I have read them all and will try to respond at some point

 

[waterboy62311]

Not to call myself an astronomer or something, but to me saying the moon has oil is similar to saying mars has water. Oil is a fossil fuel, meaning life has to have been there, which with no ability to sustain life is pretty unlikely IMO. Even if life did exist there, you would still need vast amounts of pressure, and how does the man plan to get the oil to earth?
I'll go ahead and call the man a forward thinker, in the sense of he knows we need something new, but he seems kind of ridiculous.

Also, it does take time, even with a fully cooperative Congress. The republican congresspeople have all said, they will do everything to make sure President Obama accomplishes nothing so he doesnt get re-elected. And Congress can fully overide anything he does with the numbers they have. this along with a 5-4 decision in the supreme court against anything he proposes, of course he won't get anything done. He could appoint Mr. Bush as the supreme ruling overlord of the country and all territories and it would get stopped by the court because he said it.

 

[Sadib]

I'm voting for Obama.

Wouldn't running a company give you insight into what companies need to succeed? I mean as opposed to Obama who was a glorified State Senator ( And barely a U.S. Senator ) when he was elected.

Party Platform =/= What the Candidate will do.

Of course now Obama's no longer just a state senator. He has been president for four years.

If the candidate doesn't follow the party platform, what's the point of it even existing? The republican platform is way too regressive.

 

[Old Soul]

That would cause WW3 and I find the idea of any nation owning the moon in any way horrifying actually. I don't think that it would even be a good or intelligent decision to 'industrialize' the moon and build factories there. Maybe some excavation of natural resources but not sending and building corporation sites there for manufacturing common products, etc.

randomspot was simply using newt as an example of a person who had vision. he did not support or give his idea credibility in any way. you are attacking a phantom argument. it wouldn't cause WW3 anyway that's retarded.

 

[Comebhax]

I'm not old enough, but most of the people i know is voting for Romney, you know cuz he's not black.

 

[iFi Salamander]

I truthfully may not even vote. I don't know if I want to go through all the voter registration hassle (Since this is the first election I am old enough to vote in) and get put on jury duty just to pick either of the following:

1. A man who essentially doubled our national debt, and his biggest "accomplishment" in office was taking down Bin Laden.

2. A man who blatantly lies to the public and his policies will serve nothing but to continue the entitlement and benefits for wealthy white bureaucrats, which will just continue to hurt financially deprived Americans like myself. He wants to eliminate federal financial aid in a country with already absurd tuition rates ensuring college and career opportunity will become a birthright.

Not to mention they are both awful all around, and no matter who wins, Congress will never pull the sticks out of their own *** and actually fix any of the economic problems because it would directly hinder their own annual salary.

I truly have no political affiliation and find a lot of flaws with the two super-majority parties. I think the Republicans and Democrats both spend too much of their time attempting to one-up the opposing party and have become so obsessed with this prospect they have reached a static equilibrium. Half of the campaign adds I see anymore are more "Don't vote for him because he sucks..." rather than "Vote for me, because this is what I am going to do." Then we have to take into account that they never actually follow up on what they announce as their ambitions.

 

[Snorunt conservationist]

I'm not old enough, but most of the people i know is voting for Romney, you know cuz he's not black.

Haha. Very good.

 

[はるひ]

Lemmie say, this is my first time where I actually get to vote so yes I am excited.

I never really like the president in office since 2008. I mean now, yeah he took down Bin Ladin but there's still unemployment and that healthcare system that's going to fail a whole lot of people. I think that's going to be the biggest killer if he gets reelected. People often look at Universal Healthcare with rose-tinted glasses but even people from Canada would tell you that the government run system is corrupt. That's why some even come here for treatment.

I was rooting mostly for Santorum to be nominated as I didn't care for Romney even in the 2008 election. Nowadays, he's grown on me. I mean I want a leader who's a real conservative and will stick to those conservative values and not just cross party lines in the name of politics. I feel that Romney so far as been more truthful about what he believes in even if alot don't agree with it. So yeah, it's obvious who my vote goes to in this election.

EDIT: even though the Romney campaign has out-raised them by a alot, I could see the Obama campaign winning this election again.

 

[Pesky Persian]

See I can't see how anyone can actually believe this argument. We started recovering before Obama even took office, and right now we are not even above water in terms of jobs added. Yet we are supposed to believe that no President can do better than 100,000 jobs a month, despite that even Bush was pulling in 3 times that amount at the same time in his Presidency and he was dealing with a .Com Bubble burst AND 9/11?

I never said no president can do better than 100k jobs a month. I never even said anything specific about anyone's economic policies. I'm simply saying that it takes a lot of time to heal an economy and it's difficult to do so when there are so many different ideas and people keep getting switched out of office every 4-8 years. Too many chiefs, not enough indians, as they say. That's the bad thing about having such a divided system- neither of the parties can agree on where to go with the economy (or anything, really) so nothing gets very far. I mean, obviously Yay, democracy! It's great that people get to choose, but it also means it's harder to get things done. (And honestly, can we really say the people choose? But that's a different discussion entirely.)

To be honest, I don't think Obama or Romney will do much to help the economy. That's just my personal opinion on the matter. I'm not a big fan of either one of them because they're politicians, but if I have to pick one, it would be Obama hands-down. Like I said, I can't in good conscience vote for a man like Romney when I think his social policies are ridiculous.

 

[randomspot555]

It's not like Romney has some better ideas or otherwise he would have told us already what his plans are.

Please tell me Barack Obama's vision for a second term.

There is none. There's nothing besides vague generalities and doing the same stuff as he did before. Hell, even Chris Matthews agrees with me.

Actually he has laid out his plans.

He's laid out vague generalities. During the primary, the Wall Street Journal panned Romney for not releasing policies that were detailed as some of his opponents had put out.

He's been a bit more specific in tax related issues, but not by much. And after saying he fully embraces the Ryan budget, after picking Ryan, he's backed off that type of support and saying his budget and Ryan's budget are not identical. But has declined to be more specific.

The article I linked to earlier (US News and World Report) was similarly vague on what type of support Romney would give to the Pell Grant program and how much would be cut or if it'd be restructured or anything.

If the candidate doesn't follow the party platform, what's the point of it even existing? The republican platform is way too regressive.

Spoiler alert: The party platform is the party's platform, it is not some binding document that every candidate has to submit to. The 2008 platform mentions a public option, something absent in the version of Obamacare that passed Congress. It also mentions closing Gitmo, something that the 2012 platform lacks.

That being said, an incumbent President has a LOT of control over the party platform vs a candidate for POTUS. While he might not get specific planks in, anything he didn't like would be taken out.

So basically, the Dem 2012 platform reflects Obama. The RNC platform, however, doesn't fully reflect the Romney platform.

randomspot was simply using newt as an example of a person who had vision. he did not support or give his idea credibility in any way. you are attacking a phantom argument. it wouldn't cause WW3 anyway that's retarded.

Thank you.

I truthfully may not even vote. I don't know if I want to go through all the voter registration hassle (Since this is the first election I am old enough to vote in) and get put on jury duty just to pick either of the following:

State requirements and how to sign up to vote may vary, but federal laws such as the Mobile Voter law and various fed programs should make it easier to register and to vote. In my state, you can register online and even confirm your registration, look up precinct info, etc...

Contact your county clerk or Secretary of State's office. Hell, just type in "how to register to vote in [state]" on Google. You can probably do it online.

If you don't want to vote out of pessimism, fine. That's your choice. But it is not a lot of effort to take 10 minutes to register and 10-20 to actually go vote. If there's one place to not be lazy in, it is in being a citizen.

People often look at Universal Healthcare

Yeah, but Obamacare, love it or hate it, isn't UHC.

but even people from Canada would tell you that the government run system is corrupt. That's why some even come here for treatment.

Wiki cites polls saying Canadians approve of it 91% vs the US system and another set of polls saying 70% rate it "well" or "very well"

EDIT: even though the Romney campaign has out-raised them by a alot, I could see the Obama campaign winning this election again.

Money isn't everything, but it sure does help. The problem Romney has right now is his path to 270 is much narrower than Obama's path to 270. Obama can lose North Carolina, for example, and still easily win. Romney, in contrast, needs North Carolina to win.

 

[CSolarstorm]

Either nobody, or Obama. I really don't want to vote for Obama, because I am anti-war, but according to my mom's union, it would benefit my household more than not voting at all - so I'm stuck between voting on principle and voting practically. My mom is an anarchist and she is choosing to vote for the first time ever just to help her union get a vote in for Obama.

 

[BigLutz]

Of course now Obama's no longer just a state senator. He has been president for four years.

Yeah and right now we are not able to even make enough jobs each month to stay above the amount needed for normal expansion. And have the lowest male workforce participation since the 1940s.

If the candidate doesn't follow the party platform, what's the point of it even existing? The republican platform is way too regressive.

Honestly, just to give the big wigs of the party something to do.

I never said no president can do better than 100k jobs a month. I never even said anything specific about anyone's economic policies. I'm simply saying that it takes a lot of time to heal an economy and it's difficult to do so when there are so many different ideas and people keep getting switched out of office every 4-8 years.

Our economy turned around in less than four years in the 80s, the same in the 90s, and in the 00s. And that one had a major terror attack to effect it. What is so special about this time other than a poor President?

 

[Cometstarlight]

I will be voting for R&R; Romney and Ryan

1) Well for one, he's not Obama...Okay seriously, I like Romney's policies much better than Obama's. And what's with all these, "I'm a woman, and I'm not voting for Romney b/c he offends me, OMG." .....really? I'm female, and I really like what he's planning. And he seems like a genuinely nice man, and doesn't always throw insults and attack all the time. He attacks when he needs to, not when he wants to. That's what Obama has been doing. Also Obama's 'slogan' at the end of his speech was a reminder that 'he' killed bin Laden. Doesn't matter. Not voting for Obama.
2) Nope, conservative republican, through and through, but if I do in the future, it will depend on the candidate
3) Actually, yes
4) Stated in #1

I can get into all the politics and what not, but I don't have time right now : P XD

 

[iFi Salamander]

State requirements and how to sign up to vote may vary, but federal laws such as the Mobile Voter law and various fed programs should make it easier to register and to vote. In my state, you can register online and even confirm your registration, look up precinct info, etc...

Contact your county clerk or Secretary of State's office. Hell, just type in "how to register to vote in [state]" on Google. You can probably do it online.

If you don't want to vote out of pessimism, fine. That's your choice. But it is not a lot of effort to take 10 minutes to register and 10-20 to actually go vote. If there's one place to not be lazy in, it is in being a citizen.

I still haven't completely decided, though it has nothing to do with pessimism, both candidates are just pretty terrible. After reviewing the stances and pros and cons it feels like a lose/lose situation either way. If I do vote it will be for Obama though because Romney is insufferable if you are poor.

 

[Old Soul]

I will be voting for R&R; Romney and Ryan

1) Well for one, he's not Obama...Okay seriously, I like Romney's policies much better than Obama's. And what's with all these, "I'm a woman, and I'm not voting for Romney b/c he offends me, OMG." .....really? I'm female, and I really like what he's planning. And he seems like a genuinely nice man, and doesn't always throw insults and attack all the time. He attacks when he needs to, not when he wants to. That's what Obama has been doing. Also Obama's 'slogan' at the end of his speech was a reminder that 'he' killed bin Laden. Doesn't matter. Not voting for Obama.
2) Nope, conservative republican, through and through, but if I do in the future, it will depend on the candidate
3) Actually, yes
4) Stated in #1

I can get into all the politics and what not, but I don't have time right now : P XD

um, romney wants to cut off all federal funding to organizations like planned parenthood. if you don't believe me i can find exactly where he said it. say what you want about abortion being eeeeeeviiiiiil or whatever, but organizations like planned parenthood offer many more services other than abortion that help prevent pregnancies to women that are on the low of the socio-economic ladder. the cut off of all federal funding would mean hundreds of clinics across the nation would be forced to close down and you'd most likely see the populations in these areas spin out of control.

that is not cool.

 

[BigLutz]

um, romney wants to cut off all federal funding to organizations like planned parenthood. if you don't believe me i can find exactly where he said it. say what you want about abortion being eeeeeeviiiiiil or whatever, but organizations like planned parenthood offer many more services other than abortion that help prevent pregnancies to women that are on the low of the socio-economic ladder. the cut off of all federal funding would mean hundreds of clinics across the nation would be forced to close down and you'd most likely see the populations in these areas spin out of control.

that is not cool.

Support for population control, is probably not the best argument you can make for Planned Parenthood funding. But honestly, our economy is the dumps, Obama has not shown any ability to improve it. Is funding for Planned Parenthood the biggest thing on our minds right now?!

 

[Vernikova]

If you can vote, who are you voting for? If not, who would you vote for?

Obama.

1) Why are you voting for that candidate?

There's no real reason. My state is going to vote Democrat anyway and my mom wants me to vote (not for Obama or Romney; just to vote in general).

2) Are you voting across party lines?

Technically not.

3) Will this be your first time voting?

Yes.

4) How do you feel about the economic and social policies of each candidate?

Eh.

 

[Cosmical El Amarna]

You completely missed the entire point of my post.

No and what I said has nothing to do with your point. Kind of why I quoted specifically what I did. I even agreed with you that we need to up our space game and how would should have a boosted interest in science, etc. I commented on how Newt is not a good example for the example of NASA and space. A lot of people have a 'vision' but does that mean it is good? No. He is not a good example because he said that he wants the US to own and claim the moon, which would cause international dispute. I could give you a new world, a better one in almost every way, we just need to kill a couple million people first in order for it to happen, but hey I've got that vision and that's all that matters. (I'm not being serious)

randomspot was simply using newt as an example of a person who had vision. he did not support or give his idea credibility in any way. you are attacking a phantom argument. it wouldn't cause WW3 anyway that's retarded.

I wasn't really attacking anything, merely commenting on another's comment. Saying WW3 is an over exaggeration, yes, but I used the worst possible outcome as an example to convey the point that it would cause a dispute that would most likely result in a war/battle of sorts. If any one nation claimed ownership of something like the moon, there would be international conflict. WW2 was about a country that wanted to rule the world.

 

[iFi Salamander]

I will be voting for R&R; Romney and Ryan

1) Well for one, he's not Obama...Okay seriously, I like Romney's policies much better than Obama's.

Well you must already be wealthy, or you have no clue what these policies are.

And what's with all these, "I'm a woman, and I'm not voting for Romney b/c he offends me, OMG." .....really? I'm female, and I really like what he's planning. And he seems like a genuinely nice man, and doesn't always throw insults and attack all the time.

Anyone who says that can't be taken seriously, ever.

He attacks when he needs to, not when he wants to. That's what Obama has been doing. Also Obama's 'slogan' at the end of his speech was a reminder that 'he' killed bin Laden. Doesn't matter. Not voting for Obama.

His plans are to drastically change everything in a four-eight year term. He wants to rework the education system from the ground up which isn't going to happen that quickly. He claims to want to separate money and the government when they government is mostly responsible for our debt in the first place.

And that one had a major terror attack to effect it. What is so special about this time other than a poor President?

http://www.usdebtclock.org/