Political Thread 2012
-
For comparison sake, here is the graph from 2008. You can see how far to the right and towards authoritarian he has moved.
-
PSiedTSi;326261 wrote:
Seriously? People actually support him? What do you like about him?I like his stance on foreign policy, immigration and war on terrorism. The fact he isnt afraid to say how he really feels and his politics. Most of his views seemed to be what he actually views and not just lip service, but he is a politician.
I dont like romney for several things and his religion bothers me.-- we dont need diversity, we need unity. Back when america was an awesome country we were 1 with each other. not different. but since the late 60's early 70's People started to get whiney. People cant stand on their own two feet and need everything handed to them.
Newt is boring and hypocritical
Ron is too much of a push over -
Well, you can't really take Obamacare and the stimulus out of the equation.
He didn't want to keep the Bush tax cuts, but was forced to. He said he was going to close gitmo, but found out he couldn't.I do give Obama credit for what he's done in the middle east, thats the only thing about him I like.
Shrink the federal govt? Put down the crack pipe.
Trafik Jamz;326270 wrote:
Based on his policies and actions since he took office 3 years ago. FWIW, most of the Democrats I know hate him for being so far to the right (I occasionally attend the district meetings for both parties).But let's take Obamacare and stimulus spending out of the equation (even though they used to be advocated by many on the right back in the 90's and even as recently as a few years ago) what are you seeing about him that puts him to the far left?
Can't be military/wars
Can't be size of government as it has shrunk under Obama and he has publicly demanded that a number of overlapping agencies be eliminated.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57358508/obama-seeks-power-to-shrink-the-federal-government/He has extended Bush era tax cuts for everyone
Kept Gitmo open
basically just continued with the policies of the Bush administrationDaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
DaveH;326275 wrote:
Well, you can't really take Obamacare and the stimulus out of the equation. He didn't want to keep the Bush tax cuts, but was forced to. He said he was going to close gitmo, but found out he couldn't.I do give Obama credit for what he's done in the middle east, thats the only thing about him I like.
Shrink the federal govt? Put down the crack pipe.
I agree, you can't... but it wasn't all that long ago that those were both Republican ideas (including the mandated insurance). The socialist idea would be for the government to pay for and provide health care. Stimulus spending happened under both as well (including under Reagan), not sure that I can/will call it a good thing or a right/left thing since both parties have done it.
I forgot about bailing out the auto industry as well....that first happened under Reagan in 1980 if I remember correctly (probably started under Carter much like this round started under Bush). Again, I'm calling this a neutral because I think whoever was president would have done it, regardless of what they say when they aren't in power.
Like it or not, the Federal Government has shrunk under Obama. As have most state governments.... granted they grew massively for a couple years before shrinking down in following years (though I believe the census was partially to blame for part of the spike in 2010). US Department of Labor provides the data, I just report it.
-
I was under the impression that all our actions in the middle east were already laid out before bush left office? The only major move that Obama made was removing McChrystal because he said what a shit job the administration was doing.
It bothers me that Obama gets any credit for Osama being killed. Not like we weren't looking for him for years, and it was the guys on the ground doing the legwork and ST6 that took the compound that should get the credit for that. Obama was sitting in a room 1/2 way around the world. Any American who had been sitting in that chair that day would have said "Go get him".
-
Trafik Jamz;326276 wrote:
I agree, you can't... but it wasn't all that long ago that those were both Republican ideas (including the mandated insurance). The socialist idea would be for the government to pay for and provide health care. Stimulus spending happened under both as well (including under Reagan), not sure that I can/will call it a good thing or a right/left thing since both parties have done it.Obama pushed Obamacare through with no R support at all. I'll put it firmly on his shoulders. The stimulus was a bad idea no matter who started or finished it. Obama finished it, and wanted to add more so I'll put well over half of the "badness" on his shoulders.
Trafik Jamz;326276 wrote:
I forgot about bailing out the auto industry as well....that first happened under Reagan in 1980 if I remember correctly (probably started under Carter much like this round started under Bush). Again, I'm calling this a neutral because I think whoever was president would have done it, regardless of what they say when they aren't in power.The bailout doesn't push Obama to the right, just because some of the clowns on the right would have went for it.
Trafik Jamz;326276 wrote:
Like it or not, the Federal Government has shrunk under Obama. As have most state governments.... granted they grew massively for a couple years before shrinking down in following years (though I believe the census was partially to blame for part of the spike in 2010). US Department of Labor provides the data, I just report it.Uhh, No.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
GarageAlchemist;326280 wrote:
It bothers me that Obama gets any credit for Osama being killed. Not like we weren't looking for him for years, and it was the guys on the ground doing the legwork and ST6 that took the compound that should get the credit for that. Obama was sitting in a room 1/2 way around the world. Any American who had been sitting in that chair that day would have said "Go get him".Obama made the call, so I'll give him the credit. If things went to shit on that mission he would have got all the blame, so you gotta give him the credit when it goes good.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
63vette;326278 wrote:
Lol.... If you offset the shrinking of the post office, ass 115,000 more FEDERAL jobs to the graph below.
Conveniently misses all of 2011 except January?
Hmm.... I woulda sworn that postal workers were Federal Employees too...and worse yet, ones that compete with private industry?
I know I'm sounding pro-obama here, but I'm not. I want him out of office as well. My point was that his policies as scored by political compass put him not very far off from the mainstream GOP candidates.
-
DaveH;326281 wrote:
Obama finished it, and wanted to add more so I'll put well over half of the "badness" on his shoulders.True, but I'm not sure that it is a Right/Left issue. Therefore I score it neutral.
The bailout doesn't push Obama to the right, just because some of the clowns on the right would have went for it.
Doesn't necessarily push him to the left either. The Federal Government loans/grants/gives money to private sector businesses regularly. I'm not sure that it is socialist for doing so.
Uhh, No.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-07-09/markets/29997115_1_government-workers-jobs-report-obama-federal <-through June 2011 (which I'll admit shows growth)
I can't find a newer chart other than the one I posted.... and it's possible that it ticked up again.
Washington Post wrote:
Consider these budget statistics:■“In the 1950s and 1960s, there were on average 92 residents for every Federal worker.
■“In the 1980s and 1990s, there were on average 106 residents for every Federal worker.
■ “By 2011, the ratio had increased to 145 residents for every Federal worker.
■ “Since the 1950s and 1960s, the U.S. population increased by 76 percent, the private sector workforce surged 133 percent, while the size of the Federal workforce rose just 11 percent.”
Again, I am just reporting what others have compiled.
-
The below video will clear this all up. Make sure to watch it to the end.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5Lmkm5EF5E&context=C3005bc4ADOEgsToPDskK3NKbwXNnSRnVmNlJ418z9
-
DaveH;326282 wrote:
Obama made the call, so I'll give him the credit. If things went to shit on that mission he would have got all the blame, so you gotta give him the credit when it goes good.Made the call? He got a call saying, hey WE have been looking for this guy for 10 years and we think we found him. Should we go get him?
Like i said, any American would have said yes. And if that mission would have gone to shit, they would have put it on someone else. He doesn't get called for every military operation and say yes or no. Could he even have possibly said no? No.
-
GarageAlchemist;326286 wrote:
Made the call? He got a call saying, hey WE have been looking for this guy for 10 years and we think we found him. Should we go get him?Like i said, any American would have said yes. And if that mission would have gone to shit, they would have put it on someone else. He doesn't get called for every military operation and say yes or no. Could he even have possibly said no? No.
Obama: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.
-
From what I've read about it, there was quite a bit more that went into the decision. It seems like a no brainer, but there was a lot of "world politics" that had to be considered, and if things went to shit it could have blown up in our face.
You are prob right though, if things went to shit someone else may have taken the fall.
GarageAlchemist;326286 wrote:
Made the call? He got a call saying, hey WE have been looking for this guy for 10 years and we think we found him. Should we go get him?Like i said, any American would have said yes. And if that mission would have gone to shit, they would have put it on someone else. He doesn't get called for every military operation and say yes or no. Could he even have possibly said no? No.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
Just an FYI for you guys - if you want to try and get Ron Paul to be the GOP nominee, there are steps you can take. The ND state delegate elections are happening right at the beginning of march, and the state convention happens over the march->april weekend in bismark. That group of people will decide for real who North Dakota's GOP nominees will be. All of these straw polls and caucuses and other things are all irrelevant dickwaving. What matters is becoming a delegate and going to the nominating convention.
A subset of the ND delegates will be elected in bismark as national delegates representing ND, and will then go to Florida in august for the national GOP convention. The Florida nominating convention is the only thing that decides who the GOP nominee will be. Every single thing that the media has reported on thus far is non-binding.
If you want to do what you can to get Ron Paul to be the nominee, become a delegate. You can PM me and I'll put you in touch with the right people.
Normally, there is clear frontrunner going into the national nominating convention, and so the national convention is almost a formality. But if there is no clear leader, you get what's called a "brokered convention" and there is a lot of horse trading that goes on to try and whittle the field down to the eventual GOP nominee. That means even that if Paul doesn't pull off the delegate coup he's been planning, he's going to have a significant impact at the national level.
The plain fact of the matter is, Mittens can't win without the support of the Paul voters.
So here's the possibilities, as i see them:
- Paul "steals" the GOP nomination because his ground game was better re: the delegate and convention processes. Paul stacks up better against Obama than any other GOP contender, especially with dems who are disillusioned with Obama and independants. Paul vs. Obama is a close race
- Mittens becomes the GOP nominee, and there is some concession or other hting that happens whereby the majority of Paul supporters vote for Mittens. Mittens wins.
- Mittens becomes the GOP nominee, but Paul supporters do NOT support that ticket. Obama wins.
Newt Gingrich is a national embarassment. He's doing this to get his name back in the limelight, get some speaking and book deals, and then get some more lobbying gigs.
Santorum will get crushed in a national election. He is the embodiment of everything the left hates about the right. He's got a horrible spending problem, he nears the top of corruption lists.
Listen to this Santorum video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Gwwmm-cQxU
Mitt Romney signed an assault weapons ban and then talked about how great it was. He's actually worse than Obama on gun rights.
Check out Romney on guns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9Ygw9CQ9po
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-UQG7k1uX0Gun Owners of America gives Romney a D. Same grade as Obama.
-
DelSlow;326287 wrote:
Obama: Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.Not even. What i said was, there really wasn't any credit to be sent his way as he did what anyone else would have done. Not a knock on him, just not a boost either...
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login